Liberty granted to disciplinary authority to reconsider punishment order after procedural lapse identified.
The Allahabad High Court has partially allowed a writ petition filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh, challenging the judgment of the State Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow, in the case of Anshul Jagannath. The case revolved around disciplinary proceedings initiated against Anshul Jagannath, an Assistant Commissioner (Mobile Squad) at Unnao, who was accused of negligence and misconduct while on duty.
The High Court bench, comprising Justices Sangeeta Chandra and Amitabh Kumar Rai, noted that the disciplinary authority had failed to consider Jagannath's reply to the show-cause notice before passing the punishment order. This procedural oversight rendered the punishment order unsustainable.
Background information reveals that Jagannath was suspended in April 2021 after a Special Investigation Branch inquiry found him guilty of negligence. Subsequently, a charge sheet was issued, listing three charges against him, including failure to address vehicles without e-Way bills and allegedly negotiating illegal benefits during inspections.
Despite a writ petition that sought to revoke the suspension and challenge the disciplinary proceedings, the court had earlier directed that the proceedings be concluded within two months, failing which the suspension would be revoked. However, the disciplinary proceedings continued beyond the stipulated period without seeking an extension from the court.
The High Court clarified that the timeline set in the earlier writ petition referred only to the suspension and not the continuation of disciplinary proceedings. It emphasized that procedural defects, such as the failure to consider the reply to the show-cause notice, warrant a fresh examination by the disciplinary authority.
The court modified the Tribunal's order, granting liberty to the disciplinary authority to issue a fresh punishment order after considering Jagannath's reply. This exercise is to be completed within three months.
Bottom Line:
Departmental proceedings - Disciplinary authority must consider the reply to the show-cause notice before passing the punishment order - Failure to consider the reply renders the disciplinary proceedings vitiated at the stage of punishment order.
Statutory provision(s): U.P. Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999, Rule 138B of UPGST Rules, 2017, Rule 3 of the U.P. Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956, Circular No.1819010 dated 09.05.2018.
State of U.P. v. Anshul Jagannath, (Allahabad)(Lucknow)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2865158
