Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 41171 of 2010 Petitioner :- Rajan Babu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Ratnesh Kumar Pandey Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C. Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani,J.
Hon’ble Kashi Nath Pandey,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing
Counsel.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the adverse entry recorded in his
Annual Character Roll of the year 2004-05 for the period 1.4.2004
to 31.3.2005 by the Addl. Labour Commissioner, U.P. It was
found that he was indisciplined officer and he had not taken
interest in government work and was not following orders passed
by the higher authorities. There were several complaints against
him. His work was entirely dis-satisfactory. The petitioner’s
integrity was certified. He was, however, rated to be a bad officer.
The Special Secretary, Agriculture serving as then Addl. Labour
Commissioner disagreed with the report and held that his work
was found to be very good, integrity certified and awarded the
category of very good. The Labour Commissioner for the same
period did not agree with the reviewing officer holding that the
reporting officer’s report was correct. The petitioner did not take
interest in allotted work. He remained absent from the
headquarters after giving him drive under National Child Labour
Scheme. The Labour Commissioner also observed that the
petitioner has given foolish answers in the review meetings, which
causes doubt as to how he was selected by the Public Service
Commission. He had not taken any interest in the work and took
the practice that since the Government has stopped the Inspector
Raj, he is not required to make any inspections except for special
drive. He also does not know the meaning of conviction and has
given an incorrect self-assessment report. He has not given any
report with regard to inspection of 1583 shops under Shops and
Commercial Act. The Labour Commissioner rated him to be bad
and irresponsible officer. His integrity, however, was certified as
no matter with regard to corruption was found.
The petitioner’s representation against the adverse entry has been
rejected by the impugned order on 26th March, 2010 by the
Principal Secretary agreeing with the report of the Labour
Commissioner.
We have gone through the grounds taken in the writ petition and
do not find any good reason to interfere with the adverse entry.
Learned counsel for the petitioner insists that since by Government
Order, Inspector Raj was abolished, he did not take any interest in
inspections except in the special drives. He has not given any
good ground as to why he has not filled up self-assessment form
properly. The grounds taken in the representation and the reference
to abolition of inspector raj, as an excuse to stop inspections and
survey, confirm the opinion of the reviewing authority. There is no
merit in the writ petition. There is no challenge to any procedural
irregularity.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 21.7.2010
SP/