LAWS(ALL)-2024-3-326

ASHOK KUMAR GAUTAM Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Decided On March 11, 2024
ASHOK KUMAR GAUTAM Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been instituted challenging the order dtd. 14/6/2021 passed by the Managing Director, Kanpur Electric Supply Company Limited, 14/71, Civil Lines, KESA House, Kanpur holding the petitioner guilty after disciplinary proceedings and awarding him the punishment of withholding two increments with cumulative effect, besides recovery of a sum of Rs.2,09,138.40. Also under challenge is the appellate order dtd. 5/4/2023 passed by the Chairman, Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow passed on the petitioner's departmental appeal whereby the Chairman has rejected the appeal and enhanced the penalty awarded to withholding of three increments with cumulative effect and maintaining the recovery ordered by the Disciplinary Authority.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Engineer in the employ of the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation in the year 1999. He was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer on 8/6/2008 and posted with the Electricity Distribution Division, Vikas Nagar, Kanpur Electricity Supply Company Limited, Kanpur Nagar (for short, 'the KESCo'). He worked on the said post up to 6/9/2014. On the 6th of September, 2014, the petitioner was transferred from Vikas Nagar to Sarvodaya Nagar. He joined his station of transfer where he commenced performing his duties.

(3.) According to the petitioner, on 19/8/2014, one Smt. Vimla Devi applied for a new service connection. She made an application for the purpose. The petitioner inspected her premises on 26/8/2014 and issued a certificate dated the 26/8/2014, certifying the distance between the nearest pole and her premises to be 210 meters. After the premises had been inspected, the prospective consumer was informed by the petitioner about the distance charges to be borne and endorsed a remark on the application to the effect that the consumer is satisfied about the distance charges. The applicant/consumer deposited a sum of Rs.61,200.00 on 3/9/2014 under the head of miscellaneous fee chargeable for extra cable.