STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. H.K. SRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B.D. Upadhyaya, the learned Additional Advocate General for the State - petitioners and Ms. Neelima Mishra, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 1 - claimant while working as Medical Officer (Health) at Faizabad conducted a "Sawan Jhoola Mela" and white acting as a drawing and disbursing officer incurred certain expenditure. Pursuant to an audit report, a preliminary enquiry was initiated and thereafter a regular enquiry was initiated against the respondent No. 1. Thereafter, the punishment order dated 13.08.1999 was passed against the respondent. The respondent, being aggrieved, preferred a claim petition No. 1780/1999 before the Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow, but before any final order could be passed, the Government of Uttar Pradesh suo-moto cancelled the punishment order of 13th August, 1999 and the aforesaid claim petition was dismissed as infructuous.

(2.) The State of Uttarakhand came into existence on 09th November, 2000 and the respondent was allotted the State of Uttarakhand and, consequently, the disciplinary proceedings were transferred to the State of Uttarakhand.

(3.) It transpires that on the basis of the enquiry report dated 08.09.1992, the fresh punishment order was passed on 09th September, 2002 for a recovery of Rs. 74,829/-. The respondent challenged the said order before the Public Service Tribunal, Uttarakhand, which was allowed and the recovery order was quashed by the Tribunal by its order of 17th December, 2002.