SHASHI KUMAR Vs. REGIONAL FOOD CONTROLLER & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri M.K.Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has filed the above noted writ petition praying for quashing of Punishment Order dated 11.09.1997, passed by respondent no.1, Regional Food Controller, Kanpur Region, Kanpur and the Communication Order dated 30.05.1998, also passed by the aforesaid authority, communicating rejection of his representation/appeal dated 01.10.1997 by the respondent no.3, Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies Department, U.P., Lucknow.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed on the post of Chaukidar on 15.02.1995 as a daily wager employee vide order dated 15.02.1995 passed by respondent no.1. Considering the excellent work of the petitioner, respondent no.1 appointed the petitioner on the post of Chaukidar in pay scale of Rs.750/- Rs.940/- against the substantive vacancy as a temporary/adhoc employee vide order dated 6.4.1995. On 18.07.1995 the petitioner was transferred from Jasaida to Basrehar on the same post by the respondent no.1 and in compliance of the aforesaid transfer order the petitioner was relieved on 20.07.1995 from Jasaida. On 21.07.1995, when the petitioner was going to join at Basrehar, an accident took place and the petitioner got injured and he was on medical leave since 21.071995 to 5.8.1995. The medical leave for the aforesaid period was duly sanctioned by respondent no.1 and the petitioner also got his salary for the aforesaid period. On 6.8.1995, the petitioner joined his duties at Basrehar and thereafter on 8.8.1995 the petitioner was posted at the residence of respondent no.1 and since 8.8.1995 to 19.08.1995 the petitioner performed his duties there and he was also paid his salary for the aforesaid period. On 06.01996, the petitioner received a charge sheet dated 24.02.1996 issued by respondent no.2. On 11.01996, the petitioner submitted his reply/explanation against the aforesaid charge sheet. He denied the charges leveled against him and gave detailed explanation/reply against the aforesaid charge sheet. On 07.10.1996, an enquiry report was submitted by the Enquiry Officer with the finding that all the charges against him were found to be proved. The respondent no.1 called the explanation from the petitioner vide second show cause notice dated 21.12.1996 in respect of the aforesaid enquiry report dated 7.10.1996 submitted by the Enquiry Officer against the petitioner. On 20.01.1997, the petitioner filed his reply/explanation against the aforesaid second show cause notice dated 21.12.1996 explaining/ replying therein that the charges were falsely leveled against him. Inspite of the aforesaid explanation/reply dated 20.01.1997 made by the petitioner the respondent no.1 again issued a second show cause notice dated 5.7.1997 in respect of the findings of the same inquiry report dated 07.10.1996 like the earlier show cause notice dated 21.12.1996. After receiving the aforesaid second show cause notice dated 5.7.1997 again the petitioner again filed a detailed reply on 22.07.1997. Without considering the aforesaid two explanations/replies dated 21.12.1996 and 22.7.1997 made by the petitioner against the findings of the Inquiry Officer against him the respondent no.1, vide his order dated 11.09.1997 terminated the services of the petitioner. The respondent no.1 has passed the aforesaid impugned order dated 11.09.1997 terminating the services of the petitioner without considering the material facts available on records. The findings recorded by the respondent no.1 are not supported by evidence on record. The findings of the fact recorded by the respondent no.1 are perverse and deserve to be set aside by this Hon'ble Court. Against the aforesaid order dated 11.09.1997 the petitioner preferred departmental appeal dated 01.10.1997 before respondent no.3 on the various grounds. The aforesaid appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected by the respondent no.3 by non-speaking order without applying mind and the copy of the order passed by appellate authority (respondent no.3) was not supplied to the petitioner and no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner prior to the passing of the dismissal order on his appeal by respondent no. The order of appellate authority was not supplied to the petitioner but rejection of his appeal has been communicated vide letter dated 30.05.1998 written by respondent no.1, which is also under challenge in this writ petition, along with the punishment order dated 11.09.1997.