Allahabad High Court
Narendra Kumar Sharma vs State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. Revenue ... on 3 December, 2019
Author: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 23 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 32483 of 2019 Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko & Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Pathak,Rakesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This Court has passed order dated 26.11.2019 as under:
"Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
By means of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 27.5.2019 passed by the Commissioner, Saharanpur Mandal, Saharanpur providing censure entry to the petitioner under the heading of special adverse entry. Further, vide appellate order dated 8.11.2019, the Commissioner-cum-Secretary of the Board of Revenue, Lucknow has initially treated the appeal as if it has been preferred against special adverse entry but in the operative portion of the order, the appellate authority has treated it as adverse entry and applied law applicable for adverse entry.
The law is settled that only that punishment can be awarded against an employee, which has been prescribed under the service rules and there is no punishment in the name of special adverse entry. Likewise, if the petitioner has been awarded special adverse entry, the appellate authority has dealt the appeal as if it is against adverse entry.
Both the punishment order and the appellate order are creating some confusion, which needs to be addressed on the next date by seeking specific instructions to that effect and showing the relevant provision of law justifying both the orders dated 27.5.2019 and 8.11.2019. Besides, the instructions shall also be called on the point as to whether while deciding the appeal of the petitioner, promotion order can be suspended, which was not subject matter before the appellate authority.
List on 3rd December, 2019 as fresh within top ten cases to enable the learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel to seek instructions in the matter. "
In compliance of the aforesaid order, Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned Addl. C.S.C. has produced the copy of instruction letter dated 30.11.2019 preferred by the Commissioner, Saharanpur Division, Saharanpur addressing to the Addl. Chief Standing Counsel, High Court Lucknow Bench enclosing therewith various correspondences of the record. He has also produced an instruction letter dated 02.12.2019 preferred by the same authority. The aforesaid instructions are taken on record.
The perusal of the aforesaid instruction letters dated 30.11.2019 and 02.12.2019 do not satisfy the query of the Court dated 26.11.2019. Even, the letter dated 02.12.2019 provides that the petitioner has been censured by way of awarding special adverse entry as per rules.
The Court is unable to comprehend as to where such type of punishment is prescribed under the Rules 1999. It is true that an employee may be awarded a censure entry but he may not be awarded the special adverse entry in the garb of censure entry.
The aforesaid instructions are absolutely silent on the point about the appellate order whereby the appellate authority has treated the appeal as if, it is an appeal against the special adverse entry but in the operative portion of the appellant order it has been considered as if it is adverse entry.
There is a separate mechanism in providing the adverse entry. Inasmuch as the adverse entry and censure entry may not be treated as one and the same.
Therefore, it appears that the authorities concerned have got no plausible reason to explain the punishment order and the appellate order.
Accordingly, I have by quashing the punishment of special adverse entry whereby the censure entry has been provided to the petitioner, passed by the Commissioner, Saharanpur Division Saharanpur. Further, I also quash the appellante order dated 08.11.2019 for the reasons indicated herein above.
Consequences to follow.
The disciplinary authority is given liberty to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law within a period of one month from production of certified copy of the order of this Court and if, the petitioner feels himself aggrieved out of the order passed by the disciplinary authority, he may file an appeal before the appellate authority.
In view of the aforesaid observations and direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of.
[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 3.12.2019 Reena/-