LAWS(SC)-2022-3-62

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. RAJIT SINGH

Decided On March 22, 2022
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Appellant
V/S
Rajit Singh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Service Bench No. 5554 of 2020 by which the High Court has dismissed the said writ petition and has refused to set aside the order passed by the U.P. State Public Service Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") passed in Claim Petition No.2226 of 2017 whereby the claim petition of the respondent employee came to be allowed and the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority imposing the penalty/punishment came to be set aside, the State of Uttar Pradesh has preferred the present appeals.

(2.) That the respondent employee was serving as a Junior Engineer at Balia. An enquiry was conducted by a Departmental Task Force where it was found that he had committed financial irregularities causing loss to the Government. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the respondent and others. The respondent was served with charge sheet. That thereafter the Enquiry Officer held the charges alleged against the respondent employee as proved and consequently also held the misconduct proved. The Disciplinary Authority concurred with the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer and passed an order of recovery of Government loss of Rs.22,48,964.42 as per the rules from the salary; temporarily stopping two salary increments and the remarks given for the year 2017-2018.

(3.) Shri V.K. Shukla, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently submitted that in the present case fullest opportunity was given to the respondent - delinquent officer by the Disciplinary Authority. It is submitted that the respondent was served with the Enquiry Report and thereafter was given the opportunity by the Disciplinary Authority and after considering the detailed representation by the respondent employee against the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment, which ought not to have been set aside by the Tribunal.