RAMESH PRASAD MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In pursuance to the order dated 13.03.2014, the Standing Counsel has obtained instructions in the matter, which are kept on record.

(2.) On the basis of the instructions received it has been stated that the Enquiry Officer after receipt of reply from the petitioner to the charge memo did not fix any date for oral enquiry and no witness was produced by the Department to prove the documents relied upon for the purpose of bringing home the charge nor any opportunity was given to the petitioner to cross-examine them. It has further been stated that along with charge memo the petitioner was informed that he may disclose the name of the witnesses, which he proposes to produce in evidence in his defence. The petitioner in his reply did not mention the name of any witness to be produced in evidence. The Enquiry Officer proceeded to submit his report only after considering the reply submitted by the petitioner without any oral enquiry and without any witness having been examined to prove the documents proposed to be relied upon for bringing home the charge. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report dated 21.04.2008. On receipt of the enquiry report, a notice was issued to the petitioner vide letter dated 13.09.2011 to which the petitioner submitted reply vide letter dated 2.03.2012 and categorically stated that the entire enquiry is vitiated on the ground that no oral enquiry was conducted nor any witnesses were examined by the Enquiry Officer. The reply submitted by the petitioner to the second show cause notice is enclosed as Annexure 8 to the writ petition.

(3.) It appears that the disciplinary authority after considering the explanation of the petitioner made its recommendation to the U. P. Public Service Commission in accordance with the provisions of U. P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 read with U. P. Public Service Commission (Limitation of Functions) Regulation 1954 for inflicting a major punishment upon the petitioner. The matter in that regard is pending before the Commission. Petitioner seeks quashing of the entire proceedings.