Uttarakhand High Court
Mahesh Chandra Gupta vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 15 June, 2018
Author: Rajiv Sharma
Bench: Rajiv Sharma, Lok Pal Singh
WPSB No.199 of 2018 Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, J.
Hon'ble Lok Pal Singh, J.
Mr. Nagesh Agarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. B.S. Parihari, Standing Counsel for the State.
Heard.
The petitioner earlier approached this Court by filing WPSS No.1596 of 2014 which was decided on 30.03.2017. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under :-
"Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The petitioner is permitted to file appeal against the office order dated 18.09.2014 before the Appellate Authority within a period of three weeks from today. The Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal by taking into consideration the grounds of the appeal by passing speaking/detailed order within a period of six weeks. Till then, recovery shall not be effect."
In sequel to the directions issued by this Court, the petitioner had filed an appeal before the Additional Secretary. The same was dismissed vide order dated 19.02.2018. The appellate authority was directed to decide the appeal after taking into consideration all the grounds taken in the memo of appeal and that too by passing a speaking/detailed order. The order passed by the appellate authority is neither speaking nor detailed.
The grounds taken by the petitioner in the memo of appeal have not at all been discussed by the appellate authority. The appellate authority is required to apply its mind.
The right to file an appeal gives an employee opportunity to point out on the quantum of sentence. The delinquent employee can point out that the penalty imposed is disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. There is transgression of the statutory rules. There was misreading of the evidence. The law has not been correctly applied. The appellate authority cannot decide the appeal in a laconic manner. The decision of the appellate authority must be well informed. The appellate authorities' orders are open to judicial review.
It is always open to the delinquent to take a plea before appellate authority that the proceedings were illegal and the punishment was not called for.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The appellate authority is directed to pass a fresh order in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, within a period of eight weeks from today. Till then, no recovery shall be effected from the salary of the petitioner.
However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall also be afforded personal hearing. The petitioner shall be apprised about the date of hearing by the appellate authority.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(Lok Pal Singh, J.) (Rajiv Sharma, J.) 15.06.2018 JKJ