Back
2019 Supreme(All) 2641
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SUDHIR AGARWAL, J.
Ram Jatan - Petitioner
Versus
Banaras Hindu University through its Registrar and another - Respondents
Writ - A No. 21669 of 2004, Writ - A No. 31955 of 2005, Writ - A No. 21210 of 2004
Decided On : 06-11-2019
For the Petitioner: P.M.N. Singh, Amit Kumar Singh.
For the Respondent: V.K. Upadhyay, Arun Prakash, Hem Pratap Singh, S.C.
Point of law: In a departmental inquiry an employee is entitled to be given adequate opportunity of defence and if a particular procedure is prescribed in relevant Rules, employer is bound to follow and observe the same in words and spirit and violation thereof would vitiate an order of punishment
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code,1860 – Sections 457, 380, 411 – Banaras Hindu University Act, 1915 – Section 26 – petitioner was served with the impugned order dated 26-11-96 by means of which services of the petitioner were terminated by the Registrar
Facts of the case:
The Writ Petition of the Constitution of India has been filed by sole petitioner, Ram Jatan, being aggrieved by order imposing punishment of dismissal and order communicating him that his appeal has been rejected and punishment imposed vide order has been upheld.
Finding of the court: –
In a departmental inquiry an employee is entitled to be given adequate opportunity of defence and if a particular procedure is prescribed in relevant Rules, employer is bound to follow and observe the same in words and spirit and violation thereof would vitiate an order of punishment – In view of above discussion, court have no hesitation in holding that impugned orders of punishment cannot be sustained Impugned orders are hereby quashed and the orders whereby representation of petitioner in Writ Petition and Writ Petition have been rejected are also set aside.
Result: – Order Accordingly
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate, for petitioners and Sri V.K. Upadhyay, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Arun Prakash, Advocate, for respondent-University.
2. The Writ Petition No. 21669 of 2004 (hereinafter referred to as “WP-1”) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by sole petitioner, Ram Jatan, being aggrieved by order dated 26.11.1996 (Annexure-5 to WP-1) imposing punishment of dismissal and order dated 07.01.2004 (Annexure-9 to WP-1) communicating him that his appeal has been rejected and punishment imposed vide order dated 26.11.1996 has been upheld.
3. Facts in brief, giving rise to present dispute, as pleaded in WP-1, are that petitioner was appointed as Farrash in 1977 in Banaras Hindu University (hereinafter referred to as “BHU”) and posted to work in Vishwanath Temple situated in Campus of BHU. An incident of theft occurred in the intervening night of 26/27.03.1996 in the Garbh-Grih of Vishwanath Temple situated in Campus of BHU in respect whereof a First Information Report was lodged under Sections 457, 380, 411 I.P.C. by Ram Auatar, an employee of BHU against petitioner and four others. Petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 29.03.1996 passed by Registrar, BHU exercising power under Section 4(5)(a) of Statute of BHU. A charge-sheet dated 10/12.04.1996 was issued containing a charge that he was indulged in theft, in the Temple, committed on 26/27.03.1996 and in the past also he was indulged in such type of thefts which he has admitted. Entire charge levelled against petitioner reads as under:
^^1- fnukad 26@27 ekpZ] 1996 dks Jh jke tru flag] QjkZl] Jh fo'oukFk efUnj ds vU; O;fDr;ksa ds lkFk pksjh djus ds mn~ns'; ls Jh fo'oukFk efUnj] dk'kh fgUnw fo'ofo|ky; ds xHkZ&x`g ds vUnj nkf[ky gq,A
2- fo'ofo|ky; ds lqj{kk lSfudksa ,oa LFkkuh; iqfyl ds la;qDr Nkis ds nkSjku Jh jke tru flag] QjkZl] vU; yksxksa ds lkFk xHkZ&x`g ls pksjh djrs gq, jaxs gkFk idM+k x;k ,oa :0 1808-50 udn cjken gqvkA
3- iqfyl }kjk iwN&rkN ds nkSjku Jh jke tru flag] QjkZl bl rjg dh pksfj;ksa esa fiNys lkr&vkB o"kksZ ls ¼gj eaxyokj½ dks fyIr jguk Lohdkj fd;k gS vkSj ;g Hkh Lohdkj fd;k gS fd bl dk;Z ds fy, muds ikl MqIyhdsV pkfc;ka gSaA
4- pksjh dh mDr ?kVukvksa ds i'pkr] idM+s tkus ij cjken dh x;h /kujkf'k] rkyk&pkch] xUuh cSx vkfn dks yadk iqfyl Fkkuk ds dCts esa dj fn;k x;kA Jh jke tru flag] QjkZl dks yadk iqfyl }kjk tsy Hkst fn;k x;kA
5- Jh jke tru flag] QjkZl dk mijksDr izdkj dk vkpj.k ?kksj vkifRrtud gS ftlls fo'ofo|ky; dh ifo=rk o xfjek ij vk?kkr yxk gS vkSj mudk bl izdkj dk vkpj.k xSj f'k{k.k deZpkjh dh lsok 'krsZa dh vkpj.k lafgrk @ fu;e 2-1 ds izfrdwy gSA**
“1. On 26/27 March, 1996 Sri Ram Jatan Singh, Farrash, along with some other persons associated with Sri Vishwanath Temple, entered the Garbhagrih (sanctum sanctorum) of Sri Vishwanath Temple, Banaras Hindu University with an intent to commit theft.
2. During the joint raid of security personnel of the University and the local police, Sri Ram Jatan Singh, Farrash was caught red handed along with other accomplishes while committing theft in the Garbhagrih and a cash amount of Rs. 1808.50 was recovered.
3. While being interrogated by the police, Sri Ram Jatan Singh, Farrash has confessed his involvement in similar thefts over the past seveneight years (on every Tuesday) and also having duplicate keys for the said act.
4. On being arrested for the aforesaid theft incidents, recovered amounts, locks & keys, gunny bags, etc were given into possession of the Lanka police station. Sri Ram Jatan Singh, Farrash was sent to jail by the police of P.S. Lanka.
5. The aforesaid type of conduct of Sri Ram Jatan Singh, Farrash is highly objectionable having undermined the sanctity and dignity of the University and this type of conduct of his is contrary to the Conduct Code/ Rule 2.1 of the Service Conditions of the Nonteaching Employees.”
(English Translation by Court)
4. Petitioner was required to submit reply within ten days. In the charge-sheet, ther
