- (1.) Heard learned Standing Counsel for petitioners and perused the record.
(2.) The writ petition is directed against the judgment dated 11.12.2007 passed by State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") allowing Claim Petition No. 332 of 2003 filed by applicant-respondent, R.K. Tripathi. Tribunal has set aside punishment order dated 17.09.2002 whereby punishment of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect, stoppage of integrity for 1993-94 and Censure were awarded.
(3.) A complaint was received by State Government whereby Deputy Inspector General (Prison) made a preliminary enquiry and submitted report dated 04.05.1994 recommending that claimant-respondent is no longer useful in the Prison administration and he should be administered a stern warning. After perusing the said report, Inspector General (Prison), Lucknow submitted his recommendation to State Government vide letter dated 16.06.1994 stating that in the fact finding report, Deputy Inspector General (Prison) has not found any charge of corruption proved against claimant-respondent, all the works are being discharged in accordance with Rules, prisoners are getting good and sufficient food, cleanliness and otherwise administration of Jail is good and prisoners are satisfied, but he is guilty of continuing on the basis of interim order against his transfer causing difficulty in smooth functioning in Jail and, therefore, matter may be examined and if anything is found, action may be taken. Thereafter, a charge sheet dated 23.09.1995 was issued to claimant-respondent containing three charges. Claimant-respondent submitted reply on 17.01.1996. On the query made by Enquiry Officer supplementary reply was also submitted by claimant-respondent on 05.02.1996. Thereafter without holding any oral enquiry, Enquiry Officer submitted Enquiry report dated 15.03.1996. Disciplinary Authority issued a show cause notice dated 30.10.1998 which was replied by claimant-respondent on 02.03.2000 and thereafter punishment order dated 17.09.2002 was passed. It is this order, which was challenged by claimant-respondent before Tribunal which has been set aside.;