- (1.) Heard Sri Satish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioner and perused the record.
(2.) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 30.01.2015 passed by Uttar Pradesh Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Claim Petition No. 1331 of 2001 (Nanak Sharan Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and Anr.).
(3.) Sri Satish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioners while challenging the impugned order submits that respondent No. 1/Nanak Sharan Srivastava was initially appointed on the post of Accountant on 20.09.1968 under Jail Administration and Reforms Services Department. The nomenclature of the said post was changed as "Accounts Clerk". While he was in service and attained the age of 50 years, several irregularities for different periods were found against him and following punishments were awarded to him:- "(iv) In the year 1967 Shri Maheshwar Singh, Jailor received Rs. 300/- advance tour allowance from Treasure, Faizabad after audit objection, recovery order dated 4.12.1972 was issued for making recovery from him, but the Respondent No. 1 did not sent the D.O. letter No. 24188 dated 29.1.1979 and thus committed negligence and dereliction towards his duties therefore vide order dated 26.3.1979 warning was issued to him. (v)While the respondent No. 1 remained posted in District Jail Meerut on 17.10.1997, 270 Quintal uncertified Potato seeds were purchased. Since the cost of seeds were paid illegally without following the Rules as such in respect to the said serious financial irregularity, departmental proceedings were initiated against the respondent No. 1 and in the disciplinary proceedings, the charges levelled against the respondent No. 1 were found proved and established and as such vdie punishment order dated 06.12.2000 one increment was temporarily withheld for a period of one year and censure entry was awarded in his character roll and his integrity was uncertified. (vi)In the year 1997-98 the adverse entry was awarded in the Annual Confidential report and he was graded as poor and integrity was recorded as doubtful as the petitioner was found involved in the irregularities committed to the purchase of Potato and in the embezzlement of the amount of R.R. Contractors. ";