Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... vs Vijay Pal Singh Tevatiya on 26 September, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:62303-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 723 of 2023 Appellant :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Food And Civil Supplies Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others Respondent :- Vijay Pal Singh Tevatiya Counsel for Appellant :- C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- Jagdambika Prasad Tripathi Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.
Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
(order on Delay Condonation Application)
1. Heard Shri Amitabh Kumar Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-appellants and learned counsel for respondents.
2. There is delay of 82 days in filing the present special appeal. The appeal is accompanied with an application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit.
3. Learned counsel for respondent does not have any objection, if delay in filing the instant appeal is condoned and the matter is heard on merits.
4. Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay is satisfactory and in absence of any objection, application for condonation of delay is allowed and delay in filing the special appeal is hereby condoned.
(order on appeal)
5. The intra-Court appeal filed by the State has arisen out of the judgment/order passed by the writ-Court on 22.05.2023 in Writ-A No.4218 of 2018 whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent assailing the order of punishment imposing punishment of stoppage of one increment permanently and censure entry passed by the punishing authority on 01.03.2001 as well as the appellate order passed on 19.07.2011 were set aside. The satisfaction recorded by the writ Court proceeds on the ground that neither the procedure for imposition of major penalty as applicable was adhered to nor the defence put forth by the respondent was duly considered, therefore, the impugned orders being in serious breach of the principles of natural justice, did not stand the test of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and, thus, were liable to be set aside.
6. Learned counsel for the State has drawn our attention to the enquiry report in the matter which shows that the matter is very old and the allegations pertain to the year 1993-94. The respondent-petitioner has also retired from service way back in the year 2011.
7. The findings recorded by the writ Court, on a careful consideration, in our considered view, do not suffer from any illegality calling for an interference in the intra-Court appeal, therefore, the appeal being bereft of any merit, is liable to be rejected.
8. The instant special appeal is dismissed accordingly.
(Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.) Order Date :- 26.9.2023 Shubhankar