Daya Shankar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Transport) Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC8 Jun 2022/3757/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court set aside the portion of the show cause notice proposing removal of the petitioner, finding it prejudicial. The notice against other charges remains, and the petitioner must submit a response within ten days.

What did the court decide?

The portion of the show cause notice proposing punishment of removal is set aside; the petitioner must submit a response within ten days.

Daya Shankar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3757 of 2022 Petitioner :- Daya Shankar Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Transport) Lko. And 4 Others

¶2

Counsel for Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Mishra,Brijesh Kumar,Jay Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ratnesh Chandra

¶3

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 to 5.

¶5

The petitioner has challenged the show cause notice dated 28.04.2022 issued to him after submission of inquiry report. As per recitals in the impugned show cause notice, the enquiry officer has found all charges proved against the petitioner, therefore, response of the petitioner has been sought in this regard within fifteen days. However, while doing so, the disciplinary authority has proposed punishment for removal of the petitioner. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no such provision under which, at this stage, punishment could be proposed and the petitioner be asked to submit his response to the same.

¶6

However, Sri Chandra has submitted that the proposed punishment may be indicated in the show cause notice.

¶7

I am unable to comprehend as to why the disciplinary authority should have proposed punishment, thereby creating a doubt in the mind of the petitioner that the matter has already been prejudged. Considering the aforesaid, the portion of the show cause notice whereby he has proposed punishment of removal is set aside. The rest of the show cause notice shall remain as it is. The petitioner shall submit his response to the show cause notice within ten days whereupon the disciplinary authority shall consider the said response along with other materials on record and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law with due and proper application of mind, independently and objectively.

¶8

The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶9

Order Date :- 8.6.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Suresh/

¶10

Digitally signed by SURESH CHANDRA Date: 2022.06.08 18:56:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Daya Shankar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Transport) Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daya Shankar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Transport) Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Charan @ Baura Vs the State

Rajendra Bahadur Singh S/O Late Sri Samar Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Himanshu Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Rajesh Kumar and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Shatrughan and 6 Others Vs Civil Judge J.D. Sadar Faizabad and 2 Others

Ram Bharat Yadav Vs State of U.P.Thru. Addl. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 5 Others