Allahabad High Court
Sanjay Kumar Mathur vs State Of ... on 7 July, 2021
Bench: Abdul Moin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 18
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 23559 of 2020
Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Mathur
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Deptt.Of Energy, Lucknow
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shireesh Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
Case is taken up through video conferencing in terms of order issued by Hon'ble Chief Justice taking into consideration the COVID-19 situation.
Heard Sri Shireesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.
The present writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order dated 01.06.2020, a copy of which is annexure 5 to the writ petition passed by the respondent whereby the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary during the period of suspension has been rejected. A further prayer has been made for payment of full salary to the petitioner for the period from 17.04.2019 to 09.01.2020 i.e a period of suspension of the petitioner.
The case set forth by the petitioner is that while he was working as Deputy Director (Directorate of Electrical Safety) he was placed under suspension vide order dated 17.04.2019, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition. The suspension order was passed indicating various grounds. Subsequently, the disciplinary proceedings were held against the petitioner and through an order dated 09.01.2020, a copy of which is annexure 2 to the writ petition, the petitioner was visited with a minor penalty of withholding of two increments for a period of three years and censure. The suspension order was also revoked through the same order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the punishment order dated 09.01.2020 was challenged before the Uttar Pradesh Public Services Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as " Tribunal") by filing Claim Petition No. 330 of 2020 Inre; Sanjay Kumar Mathur Vs. State of U.P and Ors and the Tribunal vide its judgment and order dated 24.08.2020, a copy of which is annexure 8 to the writ petition quashed the punishment order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as the punishment order has itself been quashed, consequently the petitioner would be entitled for payment of the full salary for the period of suspension from 17.04.2019 till 09.01.2020. He also contends that even if the punishment order had not been quashed considering that the petitioner had only been visited by a minor penalty through the order dated 09.01.2020, as such, a minor penalty cannot be used as a pretext for depriving the suspended Government employee of payment of full salary. In this regard, reliance has been placed over a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of State of U.P and ors Vs. Arun Kumar Singh and Anr passed in Writ Petition No. 487 (SB) of 2015 decided on 15.04.2015, a copy of which is annexure 9 to the writ petition. Placing reliance on the aforesaid judgment and punishment order having itself been quashed, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order which has been passed by the respondent on 01.06.2020 by which the petitioner has been deprived of the salary of the period of suspension is thus legally unsustainable in the eyes of law.
On the other hand, learned Standing counsel on the basis of averments contained in the counter affidavit argues that once the petitioner was placed under suspension through an order dated 17.04.2019 and in the disciplinary proceedings which were initiated against the petitioner, the petitioner has been found guilty even though only a minor penalty has been imposed yet once the petitioner was not completely free of all charges, consequently the salary for the period of suspension has been withheld and thus the order dated 01.06.2020 which has been passed by which the petitioner has not been found entitled for payment of any salary is clearly sustainable in the eyes of law.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the contesting parties and perused the records.
From a perusal of records it is apparent that the petitioner had placed under suspension on 17.04.2019. In the departmental proceedings which were initiated against him, he was visited with a minor penalty of withholding of two increments and penalty of censure. Admittedly, the punishment order dated 09.01.2020 has been set aside by the Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 24.08.2020, as such, there is no penalty in pursuance to the department proceedings initiated after suspension of the petitioner. Even otherwise, once the petitioner was only visited with a minor penalty then considering the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Arun Kumar Singh and Anr (supra) validly the petitioner would be entitled for payment of the salary for the period of suspension. However, the case of the petitioner stands on a better footing inasmuch as the punishment order has itself been quashed by the Tribunal and it is not the case of the respondent that the judgment of the Tribunal has not attained finality or is no longer in existence.
Considering the aforesaid, it is thus clear that the impugned order dated 01.06.2020 by which the petitioner has been deprived from the salary for the period of suspension is clearly unsustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. A writ of certiorari is issued quashing the order dated 01.06.2020 passed by the respondent, a copy of which is annexure 5 to the petition. A mandamus is issued commanding the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for payment of salary for the period of suspension from 17.04.2019 till 09.01.2020 in accordance with law and the judgment of this Court in the case of Arun Kumar Singh and Anr (supra) and considering the fact that the punishment order dated 09.01.2020 has already been quashed by the Tribunal.
Let such consideration be done within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 7.7.2021/Pachhere/-
