JAGDISH PRASAD Vs. M P STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD. Petitioner calls in question correctness of orders dated 13.1.2004 and 30.6.2006. By order dated 13.1.2004 the petitioner has been inflicted with a penalty of withholding of increment for six months. Whereas by order dated 30.6.2004, an appeal preferred by the petitioner against the punishment order has been dismissed.

(2.) PETITIONER, an ex-army personnel, was in the employment of respondent as Security, Sub Inspector, wherefrom he retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.6.2004.

(3.) THE denial of charges by the petitioner led to a departmental enquiry culminating into an enquiry report dated 6.3.1997 which was served on the petitioner with a show cause notice dated 22.11.2003 whereby, the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why on the basis of report penalty as proposed be not imposed. In the enquiry charge no.1 was found fully proved, whereas charge no.2 was found to be partially proved. On the basis of charges proved petitioner was inflicted with a penalty of withholding of increment for six months on the verge of his retirement by order dated 13.1.2004 which was affirmed in appeal which was dismissed on 30.6.2004.