Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy., ... vs Chhote Lal Kanaujia & Anr. on 13 November, 2019
Bench: Anil Kumar, Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 3 Case :- SERVICE BENCH No. - 16904 of 2019 Petitioner :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy., Irrigation Deptt. & Ors Respondent :- Chhote Lal Kanaujia & Anr. Counsel for Petitioner :- C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajey Shanker Tewari,Sunit Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Anil Kumar,J.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard Sri Pankaj Nath, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajai Shanker Tewari, learned Counsel for the respondents.
The present petition has been filed for the following main relief:-
"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing the impugned Judgment and Order dated 01.02.2019, passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, Indira Bhawan, Lucknow in Claim Petition No 2090 of 2015 (Chhote Lal Kanaujia Versus State of U.P. and Others) and contained in Annexure No. 1 to the Writ Petition."
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that learned State Public Services Tribunal (in short "Tribunal") has allowed the claim of the respondent no. 1/claimant, vide its order dated 01.02.2019. The Tribunal vide order dated 01.02.2019 interfered in the order of punishment dated 20.8.2015, whereby the punishment of recovery of Rs. 3,15,563.00/- was awarded. The Tribunal has held that the respondent no. 1 is entitled to all consequential service benefits and has directed to refund the recovered amount. The order dated 01.02.2019 passed by the Tribunal is illegal as well as contrary to law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of (2013) 6 SCC 530 (Chairman, LIC Versus A.Masilamani). The Tribunal interfered in the order of punishment dated 20.8.2015 on the main ground(s) to the effect that the disciplinary proceedings were not conducted as per Rules and orders dated 20.8.2015 is a non speaking order and as such in view of the Principles stated in the case of Chairman L.I.C. (Supra), the matter should be remanded back to the disciplinary authority to proceed a fresh, which has not been done by Tribunal and being so the order dated 01.02.2019 passed by the Tribunal is liable to be interfered. The prayer is to allow the writ petition.
Learned Counsel for the respondent no. 1/claimant, Sri Ajai Shanker Tewari submitted that in the present case the learned Tribunal has observed that during the course of enquiry, the Enquiry Officer has not fixed any date, time or place for holding the enquiry and no opportunity of hearing was given to the claimant/respondent no. 1, which is totally illegal and not in accordance with law. Learned Counsel for the claimant/respondent no. 1 also submitted that an order passed in violation of Principle of Natural Justice is liable to be interfered, which has been done by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has not remanded the matter to the Disciplinary Authority as the issue of enquiry is about 10 years old. Sri Ajai Shanker Tewari, learned Counsel for the claimant/respondent no. 1 further submitted that order dated 01.02.2019 is legal and in accordance with law. It has been further stated that the State has recovered excess amount from the claimant/respondent no. 1. Prayer is to dismiss the writ petition.
We have considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.
After going through the record, we find that Tribunal has set aside the order dated 20.8.2015, on being found that there was violation of Principle of Natural Justice, as Enquiry Officer failed to fixe date, time and place for holding the enquiry and proper opportunity of hearing was not given to the claimant/respondent no. 1. The Tribunal while passing the order dated 01.02.2019 also observed that order of punishment is a non speaking order. It is evident from the record that the disciplinary proceedings were conducted in violation of Principle of Natural Justice and law settled on the issue of holding regular departmental enquiry.
After considering the observations of Tribunal for interfering/setting aside the order dated 20.08.2015, punishment of recovery of amount to the tune of Rs. 3,15,563.00/- from the claimant/ respondent no. 1, as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chairman L.I.C. (Supra), we are of the view that the Tribunal erred in law is not remanding the matter to disciplinary/punishing authority to hold proper enquiry afresh from the stage irregularity was committed in holding the disciplinary proceedings.
For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is partly allowed and order of the Tribunal dated 01.02.2019, in issue, is modified. The matter is remanded back to the disciplinary/punishing authority to hold the proper enquiry afresh from the stage of submission of reply to the charge-sheet. The liberty is given to the petitioner to file a fresh reply before the competent authority/punishing authority. If such objection is preferred before the competent authority/punishing authority, the same shall be considered. Disciplinary/Punishing Authority shall conclude the proceedings within a period of four months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order along with reply.
With the aforesaid terms, the writ petition is partly allowed.
No order as to costs.
. .
(Saurabh Lavania,J.) (Anil Kumar,J.) Order Date :- 13.11.2019 Jyoti/-