JUDGMENT :

Om Prakash Shukla, J.

1. Heard Shri Lalit Shukla, learned Counsel representing the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, Jagdamba Prasad Dubey, challenging the judgment and order dated 09.10.2015 passed by the U.P. State Public Services Tribunal, (hereinafter referred to as the `Tribunal') Lucknow, whereby Claim Petition No. 754 of 2014 filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

The petitioner is also challenging the validity of order of punishment dated 27.06.2008, by which he was reverted to two stage below in the present pay-scale as well as the appellate order dated 28.06.2013, by which his appeal preferred against the aforesaid punishment order was dismissed.

3. Briefly stating, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Deputy Jailor in the pay-scale of Rs.9300-Rs.34500/-(Grade Pay-Rs.5400/-) and was posted in the same capacity at Central Jail, Naini, Allahabad on 14.07.1997. He remained posted at different places and worked with full devotion and satisfaction of the higher authorities during his employment.

4. Apparently, while the petitioner was posted as Deputy Jailor in District Jail, Lucknow in the year 2007, he submitted an application dated 04.04.2007 seeking to grant two days’ Casual Leave on account of the fact that he was suffering from diarrhea, however, without getting the said Casual Leave sanctioned, he left the station and also he was unauthorizedly absent from duty thereafter and as such, vide order dated 26.04.2007, he was placed under suspension in contemplation of departmental enquiry.

5. During pendency of the departmental enquiry, the petitioner joined his services on 01.05.2007 at his place of posting and has sought retrospective medical leave w.e.f. 06.04.2007 to 30.04.2007 by moving an application in this regard. Thereafter, vide order dated 20.06.2007, the services of the petitioner were reinstated and he was posted in Central Jail, Agra, however, it was directed that enquiry instituted against him would be continued as usual.

6. Pursuant to the order dated 20.06.2007, the Enquiry Officer had served a charge-sheet dated 20.06.2007 to the petitioner, containing three charges viz. (1) the petitioner had proceeded on casual leave without getting it sanctioned from the competent authority; (2) though the District Magistrate, Lucknow, keeping in mind the Assembly Election, 2007, issued direction to officer/employee not to proceed on leave or leave the headquarter, but even then the petitioner left the station without getting his leave sanctioned; and (3) the petitioner had not given any information immediately to the Jailor about his ailment along with medical certificate.

7. It seems that on receipt of the aforesaid charge-sheet, the petitioner had made an application/representation dated 23.07.2007, seeking supply of certain documents to him, but vide letter dated 12.08.2007, the Enquiry Officer refused to provide the demanded documents to the petitioner, however, opportunity was granted to the petitioner to visit the office of the Superintendent, District Jail, Lucknow in any working day and go through the demanded documents and then submit his reply within ten days. However, instead of availing the said opportunity, the petitioner moved another application/letter dated 22.08.2007, seeking again to supply him the documents as demanded vide letter dated 12.08.2007 and this time again his request was turned down. Thereafter, the petitioner had requested vide letter/representation dated 20.09.2007 to change the Enquiry Officer, which was also rejected vide order dated 08.10.2007. Ultimately, the petitioner had filed his reply to the charge-sheet on 01.11.2007, denying all the charges so levelled against him.

8. According to the petitioner, after giving reply to the charge-sheet on 01.11.2007, the Enquiry Officer had neither conducted enquiry by