SHANTI DEVI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The deceased husband of the petitioner was working as a Collection Amin. He was appointed as Peon on 1.2.1977 and thereafter he was promoted to the post of Collection Amin on 24.5.1988. While the deceased was posted as Collection Amin in Tehsil Sadar, Jaunpur he was placed under suspension on 4.2.2004. A charge sheet was served upon him on 3.3.2004 for having effected low recovery on the basis of report of the Naib-Tehsildar dated 3.2.2004. In reply to the charge sheet, he submitted his reply denying the allegations. After receipt of the reply of the deceased, an inquiry report was submitted by the Enquiry officer to the disciplinary authority holding him guilty of having effected low recovery. The deceased employee was served with a show cause notice along with a copy of the inquiry report. After receipt of the his reply, the services of the deceased were terminated by respondent no. 3. This order is subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner is that the inquiry was not conducted in accordance with the rules. The Enquiry Officer did not afford an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses who had adduced in support of the charge levelled against the employee. The second ground is the low collection of revenue by the deceased which was not a ground for dismissal of his services.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.