Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18638 of 2019 Petitioner :- Bittu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Singh,Shivam Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the impugned termination order dated 19.10.2019 and communication dated 26.10.2019 issued by second respondent and for a direction to the respondents to reinstate the services of the petitioner with full salary and entire service benefits on the post of Beldar as Class IV employee.
In response to the order dated 25.11.2019, detailed instructions have been placed by Shri Piyush Shukla, learned Standing Counsel reiterating the impugned order that the father of the petitioner was not regular employee and the petitioner had got appointment concealing the material fact and as such his appointment is not valid. While placing the instructions he has also placed the original service book of the petitioner.
The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and find that so far as the appointment of the petitioner is concerned, definitely the same has been extended by the authority under the Dying-in-Harness Rules on the post of Beldar and he joined on 4.1.2017. Suffice to indicate once the authority has given appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules against the substantive post and in case subsequently it had been found that the father of the petitioner was not regular employee of the establishment, in such situation, in case the authority has taken decision to remove the petitioner from the roll of the department, then definitely for the said purpose U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 (in short "the Rules of 1999") would be attracted, wherein full fledged procedure is given to take disciplinary action against the incumbent against whom allegations are levelled and in the absence of said procedure no punitive action can be taken against the petitioner.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, so far as the enquiry is concerned, the same is totally silent and in most arbitrary manner in one stroke the services of the petitioner has been dispensed with. The said proceeding is not in consonance with the Rules of 1999 and as such the impugned termination order dated 19.10.2019 and communication dated 26.10.2019 cannot sustain and the same are accordingly set aside. However, this order would not come in the way of the department to initiate proceeding strictly in consonance with the Rules of 1999.
The writ petition stands allowed accordingly.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 SP/