Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 1442 of 2005
PETITIONER:
STATE OF U.P. & ORS.
RESPONDENT:
RAJ KISHORE YADAV & ANR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 20/06/2006
BENCH:
Dr.AR.LAKSHMANAN & ALTAMAS KABIR
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants
and the respondents.
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 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 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.
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 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 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 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 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.