MAHESH NARAIN GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri R.P. Tiwari learned Counsel in support of this writ petition and learned Standing Counsel who appears for the Respondents.

(2.) As pleadings inter-se parties are exchanged, both side requested for the hearing and decision and, thus, we have heard the matter.

(3.) Petitioner was in service in the Public Works Department and on 31.1.2006 he retired from the post of Executive Engineer. During the entire service period, the Petitioner claims, that he was neither charge-sheeted nor any complaint against him ever came. It is only vide letter dated 5.5.2008, the Petitioner was informed that pursuant to the order dated 6.6.2006, disciplinary proceedings against him has been initiated under C.S.R. Rule 351-A and the Chief Engineer P.W.D. Kanpur was appointed as an enquiry officer. Enquiry Officer submitted its report on 18.3.2008 by which the Petitioner was called upon to file objection which he filed, and it is thereafter, by the impugned order dated 26.11.2009, punishment was awarded to the Petitioner, upon which this petition.