V.K.SHUKLA J. - (1.) PETITIONER was initially appointed as Routine Grade Assistant in the High Court in March, 1971 and was confirmed orr 1.2.1978. Sub-sequent to the same petitioner was promoted as Lower Division Assistanton 3.8.1978 and he joined on the said post on 10.8.1978. Subsequent to the same petitioner was promoted on the post of Upper Division Assistant and was con-firmed on the said post on 23.12.1998. Petitioner has stated that he was pro­moted as Section Officer on 6.8.1999, but his promotion was detained on account of his complicity in Criminal Case No. 314 of 1999, under Sections 420, 489-B, 489-C, RS. George Town, Allahabad and in Case Crime No. 315-of 1999, under Section 20 N.D.RS. Act, RS. George Town, Allahabad. Petitioner has stated that he was placed under suspension and his suspension was not ap-proved by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5036 (SS) of 2000, where in suspension order was quashed. Charge-sheet was issued to him on 08.5.2000 and then punishment was imposed on 10.8.2001 stopping two annual increments with cumulative effect. Petitioner has stated that in criminal case for which he was prosecuted he has been convicted by the Additional Session Judge, Allahabad on 26.6.2006. Against the said order, petitioner has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 5114 of 2006 wherein interim protection was accorded to him on 6.9.2006. Said appeal, it has been informed by petitioner. is still pending and in the meantime, order impugned has been passed on 22.11.2006 (Annexure-1) to the writ petition, compulsorily retiring the petitioner, exercising and invoking authority vested in Fundamental Rules 56 (c) of Financial Handbook Volume 2 para 2 to 4. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed in the present case, and as per averments mentioned in the counter-affidavit, Character Roll of the petitioner contains various adverse remark. Relevant para 11 is being quoted below: "That in reply to para 6 of the writ petition, it is stated that as per the character roll of the petitioner following adverse remarks have been awarded to him for the year 1980-81,1980-86,1987-88 and 1988-89. 1980-81 "As Examiner of Lower Court Records he has been found negligent and inefficient in discharging hisduties" The above remarks had been communicated to the petitioner through Joint Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow vice Courts D.O. Letter No. C-1626/80 dated 7.10.1980. 1985-86 (A) "Censured for his act of misconduct in availing 14 days recess from 17.6.1985 without approval of the Additional Registrar and not submitting his explanation asked for in that regard, and also for neglecting the official work and keeping it in arrears." The above remarks had been communicated to the petitioner through . Additional Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow vide Courts D.O. letter No. C-1594/1985 dated 8.11.1985. (B) "Irregular in work and attendance. Does not take adequate interest in work. Unpunctual. Integrity certified." The above remarks had been communicated to the petitioner through Additional Registrar. Lucknow Bench, Lucknow vide Courts D.O. letter No. C-200/1987 dated 11.2.1987. 1987-88 On consideration of the enquiry report dated 25.5.1987 submitted by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kamleshwar Nath, Hon'ble the then Chief Justice was pleased to pass the following orders on 14.7.1987: "He be censured for insubordination and entry be made in the Character. Roll." In compliance of the above order following censure entry has been recorded on 28.7.1987: "Censured for having mis-behaved in an unruly manner which prompted Iqramuddin to land assault at Gauri Shanker Tiwari and his uncalled for insinuation against Hon'ble Senior Judge and that Additional Registrar constitute indiscipline and act of serious insubordination." The above remarks had been communicated to the petitioner through Additional Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow vide Courts D.O. letter No. C-986/67 dated 1.8.1987. 1988-89 "As reported by the Section Officer, he did not work since December, 1988. He is also in arrears of comparison work of Paper Book Section. Integrity certified". The above remarks had been communicated to the petitioner through Additional Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow vide Courts D.O. letter No. C-1221/1989 dated 26.10.1989. Para 12 of the counter-affidavit deals in respect of Enquiry No. Nil of 1987, same is being quoted below: That in reply to para 7 of the writ petition, it is stated that following three charges were framed against the petitioner In the Enquiry No. Nili of 1987; "1. That he was in huge arrears of work and avoided to sit on the table and had become nuisance for the administration. 2. That he absented from the office off and on and when reports were made against his absence, he threatened superior officers with dire consequences. 3. That he was committing acts of insubordination spoiling the discipline and thus committed gross misconduct." The record of the enquiry further reveals that a full-fledged disciplinary enquiry was conducted by the Enquiry Officer, Sri O.P. Srivastava, Joint Reg­istrar, High Court, Allahabad and after conclusion of the same he submitted the enquiry report holding that all the charges levelled against the petitioner were proved. Afterwards, on consideration of the said enquiry report, reply and fresh representation of the petitioner, the following order was passed by the then Registrar on 23.12.1998. "A full-fledged disciplinary enquiry was initiated against Sri Rakesh Verma, U.D.A. in the year 1987 and it was entrusted to Sri O.P. Srivastava, Joint Registrar. He was also held guilty for the charges levelled against him in that disciplinary enquiry. It appears from the record of the enquiry that a show cause notice together with the report of the enquiry officer asking for his " comments was also given to him. Reply to the enquiry appears to have been rejected by then Registrar (Sri A.S. Tripathi) on 21.1.1992. But this order remained on the file and it was not authenticated or communicated to the official concerned nor any memorandum was signed or issued. With the result the matter is pending for consideration. Sri Rakesh Verma has opted for the post of Bench Secretary. For the lastfouryears no complaint with regard to his working has been received. He has also made fresh representation and has also submitted that he has sufficiently suffered during this period. He has also begged excuse for the past conduct, if any, so adjudged to be improper on his part and submits his apology. A period of more than 11 years have already been elapsed from the date of initiation of enquiry. Under such circumstances the order passed by my learned predecessor dated 31.1.1992, which was not acted upon, is recalled and instead of reverting him to the post of Lower Division Assistant he is warned for future." In compliance of the above order, the following warning was issued to the petitioner and was communicated to him through Additional Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow vide Courts D.O. letter No. C-176 Cf(A) 1999 dated 31.3.1999. "He is warned for future for his act of insubordination, spoiling the discipline committee in the year 1986. In this connection, it is further stated that vide D.O. letter No. 337/99 dated 6.5.1999, the then Additional Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow had reported that the petitioner had refused to receive the aforementioned Courts D.O. letter dated 31.3.1999. In respect of adverse remarks for the year 1988-89 following statement of fact has been mentioned in para 14 of the counter-affidavit, which is being quoted below: "That in reply to para 9 of the writ petition, it is stated that in the Character Roll of the petitioner the following adverse remarks were awarded to him for the year 1988-89. "As reported by the Section Officer he did no work since December 1988. He is also in arrears of comparison work of paper Book Section. Integrity certified." Similarly in respect of adverse entry for the year 1991-92 and 1992-93, relevant para 16 is being quoted below: "That in reply to para 11 of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner has been awarded adverse entries for.the year 1991 -92 and 1992-93, which are as under: 1991-92 "The S.O. has reported that his work is not up-to-date. He is working as examiner. Conduct good. Integrity certified". The above remarks had been communicated to the petitioner through Additional Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow vide Courts D.O. letter No. C-73/1995 dated 21.1.1995. 1992-93 "As reported by the Section Officer concerned he is habitual late comer and his work is not upto the mark. Attendance register shows that he came late on 126 days during the period from 1.4.1992 to 31.3.1993 and he was in arrears of 34,74,060 words upto 20.7.1992. Integrity certified". The above remarks had been communicated to the petitioner through Additional Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow vide Courts D.O. letter No. C-73/1995 dated 21.1.1995. Details have been given in respect of criminal case against petitioner and action taken where in Relevant para Nos. 19, 20 and 21 are being quoted below: "19. That the facts stated in para 17 of the writ petition are matter of record. It, is further stated that on intimation by the Police Station, George Town, Allahabad that on 30.8.1999, at about 7.45 p.m., near to Hashimpur Road crossing, Sri Rakesh verma, Bench Secretary (presently Upper Division Assistant), Lucknow Bench of the High Court was found in possession of 14 counter feit currency notes each of 100 denomination and ten small packets (pudla) of Ganja and therefore, a case Crime No. 314 of 1999 under Sections 489Kha and 420,I.P.C., and Case No. 315 of 1999 under Section 20, N.D.P.S. Act had been registered against himand consequently, Sri Verma nad been sent to police lock up and thereafter sent to jail. After taking into consideration the serious nature of offence, which falls with in the definition of moral turpitude, Sri Rakesh Verma was placed under suspension vide O.M. No. 6691 Account (A-1),dated 2.9.1999. Subsequently, the Additional Registrar, High Court, Lucknow Bench re-ported that Sri Rakesh Verma, Upper Divisional Assistant, High Court, Lucknow Bench was absent from duty without any Information w.e.f. 14.5.1999. Under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice a show cause notice by means of Office Memo No. 6224 Accounts (A-1) dated 16.8.1999 was issued to himasking him to show cause as to why the aforesaid absence from Courts duty be not treated as break in service and his salary for the period of absence be not with held, and the said Office Memo could not be served upon Sri Verma in spite of best efforts by the Administration. Moreover, he was also involved in case Crime No. 314 of 1999 under Section 489-Kha and 420, l.PC. and case Crime No. 315,of 1999, under Section 20 N.D.P.S. Act and he had already been placed under suspension. After taking into consideration of his such long absence and other aspect of the matter, Sri verma was placed under suspension vide O.M. No. 6918 Accounts (A-1) dated 10.9.1999. 20. That in reply to para 18 of the writ petition, it is stated that with the approval dated 7.5.2000of the then Registrar General, the charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner on 8.5.2000. The following charges were framed against him: "CHARGE No.1 That you were deputed in Bench Secretary Section to work as Bench Secretary Grade-II without; any benefits of allowances and had been reverted back in General Office under order dated 30.4.1999 passed in compliance of the Courts office memorandum No. 2224 Accounts(A-1) dated 30.4.1999 and you were posted in writ consolidation Section under order dated 5.5.1999. But you neither reported for duty to the Section Officer writ consolidation on 5.5.1999 nor moved any application regarding your unauthorized absence from duty. After a gap of several days an after thought casual leave application for the period of 5.5.1999 to 13.5.1999 was given to the Section Officer Bench Secretary Section on 12.5.1999, though you were award that you have been transferred from that Section, and there by you did not maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and committed misconduct in discharge of official duty and in violation of Rule 3 of U.P. Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1956. CHARGE No. 2 That you, while being posted as Upper Division Assistant in writ consolidation Section in the High Court, Lucknow Bench Lucknow in the year 1999 failed to attend the office and remained absent from duty without any information w.e.f. 14.5.1999. A show cause notice by Sri Maqsood Ahmad, O.S.D., High Court, Allahabad vice office memo No. 6224 dated 16.8.1999 was issued to you asking you to show cause as to why the aforesaid absence from duty be not treated as break in service and why the salary for the aforesaid period of absence be not withheld. But even after this you did not join the duties and there by fail to maintain devotion to duty and committed miscon-duct in violation of Rule 3 of the U. P. Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956. CHARGE No.3 That you are arrested by Police at Allahabad on 30.8.1999. It was obligatory to obtain written prior permission for going out of the city but you did not obtain prior permission from competent authority while leaving for Allahabad and there by committed gross misconduct, in violation of Rule 3 of the U.P. Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1956. CHARGE No. 4 That you were arrested by; the Police of Police Station, George Town, Allahabad on 30.8.1999 and it is alleged by the police that you were found in possession of 50 Gms. of Ganja and 14 fake currency notes of Rs. 1,000/-. You were challaned under Section 489 Kha/420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 20 of NDPS Act under case Crime No. 314 and 315 of 1999. The offences are serious in nature and fali with in the definition of moral turpitude. The above act diminishes the dignity of the High Court and there by you com­mitted gross misconduct defined under Rule III of the U.P. Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1956. The record of the enquiry shows that a full fledged departmental enquiry was conducted by the Enauiry Officer. There after, on consideration of the enquiry report dated 4.12.2000 submitted by the Enquiry Officer and comments of the petitioner, the Registrar General vide order dated 8.8.2001 punished the petitioner by way of with holding 2 in crements with cumulative effect. Vide O.M. No. 45597Accounts (A-1) dated 10.8.2001 the punishment was imposed upon the petitioner. 21. That facts stated in para 19 and 20 of the writ petition are irrelevant for the purposes of the present case. Even otherwise the order dated 10.8.2001 has become final and even otherwise, it is not under challenge in the present writ petition nor can any objection to the same be raised at this stage and at this distance of time. On account of all these material, which has been stated in the counter-affidavit, stand has been taken that action of compulsory retirement is totally justifiable action.
(3.) REJOINDER affidavit has been filed and there in plea has been taken that proceedings are unjustifiable and further only the adverse entry for the year 1985-86 has been communicated. Adverse entry for the year 1986-87 was expunged. Petitioner submits that except adverse entry for the year 1985-86,1988-89,1991 -92 and 1992-93, no other entry was communicated to him. Petitioner has denied the averments mentioned in the counter-affidavit and has alleged that action taken against him is punitive in nature.;