The mandatory nature of the procedure under Rule 7 of the Rules of 1999 in disciplinary proceedings and the requirement to adhere to natural justice principles.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Ms. Arti Raje, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 and Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents No.2 and 3.

2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging therein the order dated 24.6.2021 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Firozabad, whereby punishment in the form of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect has been imposed. Petitioner through this writ petition has also challenged the order dated 6.2.2023 passed by the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj, whereby appeal filed by the petitioner against the punishment order dated 24.6.2021 has been rejected.

3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the District Basic Education Officer, Firozabad passed an order on 4.3.2021, whereby petitioner’s services were placed under suspension in contemplation of the disciplinary proceedings. In the suspension order dated 4.3.2021, it was mentioned that one Smt. Simra Devi, who was working as cook in Primary School Rasoolabad, Block Tundla, District Firozabad, was cleaning the kitchen and due to leakage in the gas cylinder, she suffered serious injuries. Petitioner at that point of time was posted as Head Mistress in the said school, but she was on child care leave from 5.2.2021 to 16.3.2021. Though on receiving the information in respect of the aforesaid incident petitioner, came in the school and took Smt. Simra Devi to Primary Health Centre but from there Smt. Simra Devi was referred to S.N. Hospital, Agra. Petitioner did not extend cooperation in the medical treatment of Smt. Simra Devi and came back to her home.

4. The Inquiry Officer issued a charge-sheet to the petitioner on 25.3.2021, wherein five charges were levelled and the petitioner was required to submit her reply to the charges within fifteen days.

5. Petitioner submitted her reply to the aforesaid charge-sheet dated 25.3.2021 on 3.4.2021, wherein petitioner categorically stated that every help which was possible on the part of the petitioner was extended to Smt. Simra Devi in respect of her treatment but since the behaviour of the villagers and the family members of Smt. Simra Devi was very violent towards the petitioner and her husband, therefore the petitioner, in the night at about 9.00 p.m., came back to her home.

6. The Block Education Officer, Block Tundla, District Firozabad, after receiving the aforesaid reply of the petitioner, straightaway submitted inquiry report to the District Basic Education Officer, Firozabad on 21.6.2021. The Inquiry Officer in the aforesaid inquiry report dated 21.6.2021 has recorded finding that all the charges levelled against the petitioner in the charge-sheet have been found proved. The Disciplinary Authority i.e. the District Basic Education Officer, Firozabad, on the basis of the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer in the inquiry report dated 21.6.2021, passed an order on 24.6.2021 whereby punishment of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect has been imposed against the petitioner.

7. Petitioner against the aforesaid punishment order dated 24.6.2021 passed by the Disciplinary Authority filed an appeal as contemplated in Rule 7 of The U.P. Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973, wherein categorical ground was taken by the petitioner that Inquiry Officer has not followed due procedure prescribed under the rules for the purpose of inquiry. It was categorically stated in the appeal that no date, time and place was fixed for holding inquiry. The Inquiry Officer after receiving reply of the petitioner to the charge-sheet, has straightaway submitted inquiry report on 21.6.2021. Petitioner in her appeal also took categorical ground that after receiving the inquiry report dated 21.6.2021, the Disciplinary Authority did not issue any show cause notice and also did not provide copy of the inquiry report to the petitioner to submit reply against the findings recorded in the inquiry