PRAMOD KUMAR BHUKESH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. L. P. Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel representing the State of Uttar Pradesh and Shri Rishabh Kapoor, learned counsel representing the Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam (hereinafter referred to as 'Nigam'), a statutory body established under section 3 of Uttar Pradesh Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975.

(2.) Facts of this case and the chain of events as disclosed by the pleadings available on record and on perusal of the records produced before the Court by the State Government and also by the Nigam, are interesting and disturbing at the same time. The petitioner, an employee of Nigam, is first inflicted with punishment of dismissal which is subsequently stayed by the State Government with the direction to the authorities of the Nigam to take a fresh decision, whereupon the Chairman of the Nigam reduces the order of punishment from dismissal to stoppage of two annual increments with permanent effect coupled with a warning to the petitioner that he will not misconduct himself again. The said decision of the Chairman of the Nigam reducing the punishment from dismissal to stoppage of two annual increments is reconsidered by the authorities of the Nigam and cancelling the said order of the Chairman, punishment order passed initially dismissing the petitioner is revived/restored.

(3.) As to whether the State Government could have stayed the order of punishment and directed the Nigam to reconsider the same, is one of the issues, which needs to be considered in this case.