- (1.) This Special Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 878 of 1972, quashing the order of the Director, Postal Services (dated the 12th May, 1972) reducing the respondent, Oudh Behari Singh, an erstwhile Sub-Post Master in the Singar Nagar, Post Office, Lucknow, in the time scale for a period of three years. The impugned order was set aside on the ground that the Senior Superintendent, Post Offices (Lucknow Circle) was not competent (sic) as disciplinary proceedings or to get an inquiry done, to impose the penalty, under sub-cl. (v) of Rule 11 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules to be hereinafter referred as the Rulesthe disciplinary authority to inflict the penalty in the present case being the Director of Postal Services.
(2.) Briefly stated, the relevant facts are these: The respondent Oudh Behari. Singh was working as Sub-Post Master, Singarnagar, Lucknow, on 19-9-1968, which was a day of general strike in the Post and Telegraph Department. He asserts that, in order to have a smooth working, he accepted the services of three outsiders to do odd jobs. The strike was subsequently called off and it is said the letters of thanks were issued to them, on 19-9-1968. According to the Department, no information about this arrangement was sent to the Divisional Officer by the petitioner, and when Sri R. P. Tripathi was deputed by the Department, he, on receipt of some information informed that no outsider had been employed at Singarnagar Sub-Post: Office. Ved Prakash, Inspector of Post Offices, according to the petitioner, submitted a report to the effect that the aforesaid three persons had actually: worked at the Sub-Post Office on 19-9-1968. Some concessions were announced by the Government of India on 13-10-1968; on receipt of the concessions the petitioner is said to have furnished the applications of the volunteers for favour of disposal, along with his letter dated 20-12-1968, intimating to the Department, at the same time, that their services had been utilised on 19-9-1968. No such letter was received in the Divisional Office, Upon a preliminary in- quiry made by another Inspector R. N.Bhatnagar, it was found that the petitioner had unauthorisedly issued the letter of thanks to the volunteers. Thereafter, a charge-sheet was served on the petitioner, and the Inquiry Officer was appointed by the Superintendent, Post Offices (Lucknow Circle). Ultimately, the disciplinary inquiry was done by Bhatnagar, who after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and recording the evidence of the witnesses submitted his finding on 28-5-1971, vide Annexure 2. On receipt of the findings a show-cause notice was issued by the Superintendent, Post Offices, Lucknow Division, it was cancelled and another notice was issued by the Director of Postal Services, it being Annexure 4. The respondent submitted his reply to the second show-cause notice. The Director of Postal Services, passed the impugned order on 12-5-1972.
(3.) Being aggrieved against that order, the respondent invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution, contending, in the main, that the Senior Superintendent, Post Offices, Lucknow Division, was not competent under the Rules to initiate the departmental inquiry and to appoint an Inquiry Officer, rendering the order made by the Director 'void and illegal', and secondly that in the conduct of the disciplinary proceedings, the Inquiry Officer breached the principles of natural justice.;