'
...
STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.
A
V.
RAJ KISHORE YADAV AND ANR.
-
JUNE 20, 2006
1
[DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND ALTAMAS KABIR, JJ.]
B
~
Constitution of India, 1950:
.......
Article 226-Jnterference by High Court with orders passed by competent c
authorities in disciplinary proceedings-Employee dismissed from service-
High Court setting aside dismissal order and directing his reinstatement-
Held, the charges are very serious in nature and the same have been proved
beyond any doubt-High Court has limited scope of interference in the
administrative action of the State in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction
under Article 226 and, therefore, the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer D
and the consequent order of punishment of dismissal from service should not
be disturbed-On merits, High Court erred in modifying the punishment
imposed by the disciplinary authority-Judgment of High Court being perverse
is set aside-Service Law-Dismissal from service.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1442 of2005. E
From the Judgment and Order dated 21. 11.2003 of the High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1505 of 1996.
Pramod Swamp, B.N. Jha and Jatinder Kumar Bhatia for the Appellant.
Jitendra Mohan Sharma for the Respondents.
F
The Order of the Court was delivered by
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and the
respondents.
G
This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the High Court
of Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.1505/1996 allowing the Writ
Petition filed by the respondent herein. The High Court by the impugned
order modified the punishment by way of stoppage of two increments with H
....
63
64
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2006] SUPP. 3 S C.R.
A cumulative effect and quashed the order of dismissal from service awarded
to the respondent herein. The High Court also ordered reinstatement with all
pecuniary and consequential service benefits.
We have been taken through the charges framed against the respondent
herein and also the Enquiry Report submitted by the Enquiry Officer and the
B order passed by the Disciplinary Authority and also the order passed in the
Claim Petition. Five charges were framed against the respondent herein. The
charges are very serious in nature. The charges No.1,2,3 and 5 have been
proved beyond any doubt. Charge No.4 has not been proved.
C
On a consideration of the entire materials placed before the authorities,
they came to the conclusion that the order of dismissal would meet the ends
of justice. When a Writ Petition was filed challenging the correctness of the
order of dismissal, the High Court interfered with the order of dismissal on
the ground that the acts complained of were sheer mistakes or errors on the
part of the respondent herein and for that no punishment could be attributed
D to the respondent. In our opinion, the order passed by the High Court quashing
the order of dismissal is nothing but the error of judgment. In our opinion,
the High Court was not justified in allowing the Writ Petition and quashing
the order of dismissal and granting continuity of service with all pecuniary
and consequential service benefits. It is a settled law that the High Court has
E limited scope of interference in the administrative action of the State in
exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India and, therefore, the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer and the
consequent order of punishment of dismissal from service should not be
disturbed. As already noticed, the charges are very serious in nature and the
F same have been proved beyond any doubt. We have also carefully gone
through the Enquiry Report and the order of the Disciplinary Authority and
of the Tribunal and we are unable to agree with the reasons given by the
High Court in modifying the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary
Authority. In short, the judgment of the High Court is nothing but perverse.
We, therefore, have no other option except to set aside the order passed by
G the High Court and restore the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority
ordering dismissal of the respondent herein from service. It is ordered
accordingly. The Civil Appeal stands allowed.
No costs.
H R.P.
Appeal allowed.
...
Lex