BRIJ LAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.P. Singh who is now appearing for the respondent nos.2 and 3 and the learned Standing Counsel.

(2.) The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 11.10.2006 and the order dated 08.07.2004 passed by respondent nos.2 and 3 respectively terminating the services of the petitioner and uphold the same in appellate jurisdiction.

(3.) The facts in brief are that records of Criminal Case No.207 of 1989, under Sections 7/16 P.F. Act was summoned by the Deputy Registrar, High Court vide letter dated 24.03.2003 as required in Criminal Revision No. 2618 of 1984, written to the Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar. However, the same was not traceable and an inquiry was made in the matter, the inquiry report was submitted by? Sri B.K. Srivastava, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar vide report dated 19.01.2004, wherein prima facie he found that after decision of the aforesaid case in Appeal No. 180-M of 1982? decided on 07.12.1984, the file was missing and never restored to record room. It was not clear that after decision whether the record was sent back or not and therefore prima facie he found that the petitioner Sri Brij Lal and one Sri Laxmi Kumar were guilty of such misconduct. Subsequently, chargesheet dated 07.02.2004 was given to the petitioner wherein he was charged with the misconduct that after decision of the aforesaid criminal case in appeal on 07.12.1984, the record were sent to his office but he did not sent the record to the? record room and the record of the case requestioned by the High Court was found missing. It was also provided that in case he wants personal hearing, he can inform the inquiry officer about the same. He was also given liberty to give the names of the witnesses if he wants to examine and thus, he was provided full opportunity of hearing while giving the chargesheet.