Heard Sri Ajay Madhawan, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Notices on behalf of the opposite parties have been accepted by Sri Vinay Shanker, Advocate, who has put in appearance on their behalf.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the punishment order dated 12.09.2016, whereby the petitioner has been provided punishment of reduction to lower stage in his time scale of pay by 10 stages for a period of three years with further direction that he shall not earn increments of pay during the period of such reduction, and on expiry of the period, the reduction shall have effect of postponing future increments of his pay.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned punishment order passed against the petitioner is so harsh and the same does not consumerate with the allegations levelled against the petitioner. He has also submitted that the allegations so levelled against the petitioner were not directly related with the petitioner but even-then he has been awarded major punishment. He has also submitted that the petitioner has filed a statutory appeal raising all pleas and grounds against the order of punishment but the Appellate Authority has not considered the factual and legal matrix of the issue and passed a mechanical order on 20.04.2017 rejecting the appeal of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that both the orders i.e. the punishment order dated 12.09.2016 and the appellate order dated 20.04.2017 have been passed without considering the grievance of the petitioner properly and without looking into the facts as to whether such harsh punishment can be awarded to the petitioner or not.
Sri Vinay Shanker, learned counsel for the opposite parties has submitted that both the orders have been passed absolutely considering the grievance of the petitioner in a justifiable manner and no interference is called for thereon. He has also submitted that the order dated 20.04.2017 besides the punishment order dated 12.09.2016 have been assailed in this writ petition, therefore, those orders have been assailed after a substantial delay.
However, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that due to inadvertence the petitioner has filed second appeal challenging the aforesaid orders, but as soon as he came to know that the second appeal may not be entertained, he has filed the instant writ petition before this Hon'ble Court challenging the aforesaid orders dated 12.09.2016 and 20.04.2017.
The matter requires consideration.
Let counter affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.
List this petition in the week commencing 04.03.2019 as fresh.
Order Date :- 28.1.2019 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]