D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) The petitioner has been punished on account of certain misconduct pursuant to a domestic inquiry. While inflicting punishment the petitioner was placed at the bottom of the scale of Rs. 950-1,090 for five years. Thus, the petitioner has been reduced to the lower stage in a time-scale and at the same time, his increment has been withheld for five years.
(2.) Shri Surendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in fact two punishments have been inflicted which cannot be done for one offence. He relied on a circular dated 3.7.1993 in support of his contention that there cannot be any reversion to the basic pay.
(3.) Mr. Samir Sharma. learned counsel for respondents on the other hand contends that clause 5 of Regulation 63 of the U. P. State Roadways Corporation Employees (Other than Officers) Service Regulation, 1981 (hereinafter called as the Regulation) provides reduction to a lower stage in a time-scale as major penalty. According to him. the said provision does not prescribe reduction to a lower stage to a stage other than bottom of the scale, viz., the basic pay. Therefore, the circular Issued cannot override the regulation having a statutory force. He further contends that the punishment inflicted is a single punishment and not a dual punishment as contended by Mr. Singh.;