A recent legal case involving the suspension and termination of a government clerk has led to a significant legal decision. The court’s analysis delves into the intricacies of departmental proceedings, offering insights into the judicial review process. This landmark ruling highlights the importance of adherence to legal procedures in disciplinary actions against government employees.
Facts
- The respondent, a Lower Division Clerk in the Revenue Department, was suspended on 04.10.1986 on charges of misappropriation of Government funds.
- Departmental proceedings were initiated against the respondent, and he was eventually imposed with a major penalty of termination of service on 13.06.1988.
- The respondent participated in the enquiry initially but remained ex parte later on.
- Appeals and revisions were filed against the imposed penalty, all of which upheld the termination of service.
- 11 years later, the respondent filed Claim Petition No.1903 of 1999 under the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976, seeking to set aside the punishment order.
- During the period between the major penalty imposition and the claim petition, criminal proceedings were initiated against the respondent, resulting in his acquittal.
- The challenge was raised 11 years after the initial order, which should have led to its dismissal.
- The claim petition filed by the respondent was allowed by the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Tribunal in 2013.
- A writ petition filed by the appellants in 2015 was rejected by the Division Bench of the High Court in 2017.
- The respondent participated in the enquiry proceedings but later chose to remain ex parte.
Also Read: Electoral Malpractices in Mayor Election
Decision
- The appeal is allowed with no order as to costs.
- An ex gratia payment of Rs.1,00,000/- is directed to be paid to the respondent due to the respondent’s long litigation.
- The orders passed by the Tribunal and the High Court are set aside, and the claim petition by the respondent is dismissed.
- The payment should be made to the respondent within six weeks from the date of this judgement.
Also Read: Balancing Power and Transparency: Electoral Bonds Struck Down, Disclosure Mandated
Case Title: THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. KRISHNA BAHADUR SINGH (2021 INSC 488)
Case Number: C.A. No.-005748-005748 / 2021
