Ranjana Pandya, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Shishir Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents.
(2.) The writ petition is directed against order dated 14.10.2005 passed by Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Government of U.P., Lucknow imposing punishment of dismissal upon petitioner from the post of Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department.
(3.) The only ground of challenge pressed before this Court is that though a major penalty has been imposed upon petitioner but no oral inquiry whatsoever was conducted by Inquiry Officer. After submission of charge-sheet without holding any oral inquiry and recording of statement of witnesses, Inquiry Officer straightway submitted report and thereafter punishment of dismissal has been imposed upon petitioner on the basis of said inquiry report. Our attention is drawn to para 3 of writ petition, which reads as under: 3. That the Enquiry Officer did not hold any enquiry in the matter. No opportunity of oral hearing was given to the petitioner by the Enquiry Officer and no opportunity was given to the petitioner to appear and participate in the enquiry. The petitioner was never informed about the date, time and place for holding enquiry. The petitioner submits that it is settled law that non-submission of reply to the charge sheet would not mean that the charges stands admitted and do not require any proof in the departmental proceedings. Since no enquiry was been held by the Enquiry Officer in the matter, the entire disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner stands vitiated being violative of the principles of natural justice and Rule 7 of the U.P. Government Servant (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 1999, which lays down the procedure for holding enquiry where major penalty is to be awarded, and the impugned order dated 14.10.2005 is rendered illegal and unsustainable.;