- (1.) The petitioner, a Senior Assistant in the Department of Food and Civil Supplies has sought to assail the validity of the order dated 22/5/2007 passed by the respondent no.3 as affirmed in appeal by the respondent no.2 vide is order dated 25/2/2009. In terms of the impugned order and consequent to culmination of the disciplinary proceedings taken against him he has been inflicted the following punishments: (a) A recovery of Rs.59927/- on account of excess withdrawal from the G.P.F. Account. (b) Recovery of a sum of Rs.412789.68/- from him; (c) the stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect. (d) the recordal of an adverse entry in the character roll of the petitioner.
(2.) This order passed by the respondent no.3 has been affirmed by the respondent no.2 acting as the Appellate Authority under the relevant rules. This Court has heard Shri Adarsh Bhushan in support of the writ petition and Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State respondents. The salient facts which may be noticed and as would be relevant for disposal of the instant writ petition are as follows. The petitioner was initially appointed as a Class-III employee in the respondent Department in 1975. He was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant in 1978 and upon attaining the age of superannuation retired on 29/2/2008. It appears that on 18/7/2005, a charge-sheet was issued against him alleging therein that because of his negligence and misconduct the Government had suffered huge losses consequent to his failure to rectify supplies and accordingly disciplinary proceedings were instituted against him. Upon receipt of the said charge-sheet, the petitioner appears to have elicited further information from the Department vide his letter dated 16/8/2005 and ultimately submitted a reply on 26/9/2005 denying the charges levelled against him. The Inquiry Officer upon receipt of the reply of the petitioner appears to have proceeded in the matter and ultimately submitted a report dated 21/1/2006. The objections of the petitioner were invited upon the findings recorded in the said inquiry report and after receipt of the same and upon a consideration of the reply submitted by the petitioner, the impugned order dated 22/5/2007 came to be passed. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the petitioner preferred a Departmental appeal which also came to be dismissed by the order dated 25/2/2009.
(3.) Shri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order is clearly arbitrary and illegal inasmuch as in the course of the inquiry proceedings the petitioner was neither called before the Inquiry Officer to submit his case, no witnesses were examined in his presence, he was afforded no opportunity of cross-examination nor was the petitioner provided any of the documentary evidence relied upon and referred to in the inquiry report. He has submitted that the provisions of the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 apply in the facts of the present case and that since a major penalty of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect had been imposed upon him, the same could not have been inflicted without following the procedure prescribed under the Rules aforementioned and holding of a detailed oral inquiry.;