Dinesh Pal vs State Of U.P. And 2 Ors
2014 Latest Caselaw 7872 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 59
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 57110 of 2014
 

 
Petitioner :- Dinesh Pal
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Ors
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manmohan Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

It appears that some disciplinary proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner vide charge-sheet dated18.5.2013.During pendency of the disciplinary proceedings petitioner was promoted to the next higher post of Assistant Teacher, Junior High School vide order dated 31.5.2013 the petitioner submitted a reply to the charge sheet on 6.6.2013. The inquiry officer submitted inquiry report on 2.7.2013. It is said by the petitioner that thereafter no final orders were passed by the disciplinary authority. Now on 9.10.2014 an order has been passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Etah cancelling the promotion of the petitioner on the ground that the same had been wrongly made during pendency of disciplinary proceedings and subsistence of his suspension.

Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that instead of finalizing disciplinary proceedings respondents have cancelled the promotion of the petitioner after one year thereby causing great prejudice that too without giving any opportunity to him in the matter.

Strictly speaking the promotion should not have been made during pendency of the disciplinary proceedings and operation of suspension order. The recommendation in respect to him should have been kept in sealed cover, but, nevertheless, the fact remains that the promotion was made way back on 31.5.2013. More than one year has passed and the petitioner has been working on the promotional post.If the inquiry report has been submitted in the disciplinary proceedings way back on 2.7.2013, it is inexplicable as to why instead of completing the  disciplinary proceedings the impugned order has been passed.

Considering the peculiar facts of the case operation of the impugned order dated 9.10.2014 shall remain stayed however, with the liberty to the respondent no. 2 to take final decision in the pending disciplinary proceeding within a period of one month.

It is made clear that if the said decision had already been taken then the benefit of this order shall not be available to the petitioner.

Respondents shall file counter affidavit within four weeks.

List immediately thereafter.

Order Date :- 29.10.2014

M.A.A.