Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 38451 of 2010 Petitioner :- Shiv Shankar Lal Srivastava Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- D.K. Tripathi Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Shishir Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing
Counsel.
According to the petitioner, he is a Stenographer Grade-I and
Stenographer Grade-I is always attached with the District
Magistrate i.e. Collector. It appears that some complaint was made
and the petitioner was suspended pending inquiry. Petitioner filed
a writ petition before this Court and by order dated 07.09.2009, the
order of suspension was quashed and competent authority was
directed to complete the disciplinary proceeding against the
petitioner within a period of four weeks. Now, the competent
authority i.e. Commissioner has taken a decision on the basis of
charges levelled against the petitioner that charges are not proved
and the departmental proceeding has been terminated in favour of
the petitioner. After exoneration petitioner submitted an
application that he may be permitted to join. Then, the District
Magistrate by order dated 07.06.2010 has attached the petitioner
with the Office of S.D.M., Sadar. According to the petitioner said
attachment is virtually reversion and reduction in pay because a
Stenographer Grade-I is always attached to the Collector and he
cannot be attached or posted with the Sub Divisional Magistrate or
any other Officer, therefore, petitioner submits that attachment
itself to the S.D.M. by the District Magistrate is not correct and it
is by way of punishment. According to the petitioner admittedly
the disciplinary proceeding has been terminated in his favour,
therefore, he cannot be punished like such. Hence, the present writ
petition.
I have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the
record. According to the petitioner he was attached to the District
Magistrate before the order of suspension, but admittedly now the
disciplinary proceeding has been terminated in favour of the
petitioner and he has honorarily been acquitted and now there is no
charge against him, therefore, if there is no punishment a person
cannot be punished otherwise. As according to the petitioner the
attachment to the S.D.M. concerned is impliedly a reversion and
reduction in pay, but this Court is not having any material before it
regarding verification whether attachment to the S.D.M. concerned
on the basis of direction issued by the District Magistrate will be
reversion or not, therefore, in my opinion, it will be appropriate
that the competent authority may consider and decide the issue
which has been raised by the petitioner before this Court. In such
circumstances, the petitioner is being given a liberty to approach
the respondent No.2 within a period of three days from the date of
receipt of the certified copy of the order and if such representation
is filed within the period mentioned above, respondent No.2 is
directed to take an appropriate decision, if possible, after giving an
opportunity to the petitioner, within a period of two weeks from
the date of receipt of the representation by a speaking and reasoned
order.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 6.7.2010
NS