Disciplinary actions must be supported by clear reasoning; failure to provide reasons renders such actions invalid.

JUDGMENT :

J.J. Munir, J.

1. This judgment will decide the present writ petition and connected Writ-A No. 2255 of 2024. Since affidavits have been exchanged in Writ-A No. 18422 of 2023, the said petition will be treated as the leading petition and facts noticed from the pleadings there.

2. The petitioner substantially seeks to challenge an order dated 4.9.2023 passed by the State Government, punishing him with the award of a censure after disciplinary proceedings. He also challenges the result of the Departmental Promotion Committee held on 5.9.2023, by which respondent No. 3, an Officer junior to him, has been promoted to the post of a Chief Development Officer/Joint Development Commissioner/Joint Commissioner. The petitioner further prays that a mandamus be issued by this Court, ordering the State Government, represented by the Principal Secretary, Rural Development and the Commissioner, Rural Development, to consider the petitioner's name for promotion before the third respondent and others junior to him.

3. In the connected writ petition, the petitioner challenges an order passed by the State Government dated 4.10.2023, rejecting a representation made by the petitioner against the order dated 4.9.2023, impugned in the leading petition. This petition has, therefore, been heard on the basis of affidavits exchanged in the leading petition.

4. The petitioner is an officer in the Provincial Civil Service of the State. He belongs to the 1994 Batch. He joined service as a Block Development Officer on 11.12.1997. The petitioner says that he is the topper of the 1994 Batch. At the time this petition was presented, the petitioner was working as the Deputy Commissioner, National Livelihood Mission, Pratapgarh. The petitioner stands at Sr. No. 1 of the 1994 Batch in the seniority list of the Provincial Development Service Cadre. A seniority list was issued in the year 2012, where the petitioner's name figures at Sr. No. 289. He says that he has an exceptionally good service record and never awarded any adverse entry, except the one in the month of February, 2002, which the petitioner has represented against to the State Government. The representation was said to be pending until time when the leading petition was instituted, but this representation now stands decided and, in any case, does not survive the order dated 4.10.2023, impugned in the connected petition.

5. While the petitioner was stationed at Pratapgarh, he was placed under suspension pending inquiry vide order dated 29.11.2022. The suspension order says that the petitioner, while posted as the Deputy Commissioner (Self-Employment), Pratapgarh, inspected the community toilet at Village Kewaradih on 17.6.2022. On the basis of his inspection report, in place of Smt. Sita Devi, some other volunteer from the Self-Assistance Group was selected to look after the community toilet. In consequence, Writ-C No. 4333 of 2022, Stri Mahila Swayam Sahayata Samooh through its President v. State of U.P. and others, was instituted before the Lucknow Bench of this Court. It is then remarked that the petitioner had not submitted his report regarding the community toilet based on records, on account of which the State Government was placed in an uncomfortable position before this Court. For the said happening, the petitioner was found prima facie guilty. It is remarked in the suspension order that for the petitioner not discharging his duties with responsibility, the Government's image was tarnished. The order goes on to say that on this allegation, disciplinary proceedings are contemplated, pending which the petitioner has been placed under suspension. There was nothing else said in the suspension order, except the allegations indicated.

6. The petitioner says that he had carried out his inspection on 17.5.2022, acting on complaints received in his office and made his report after inspection based on an objective assessment of the situation that prevailed on the spot. His report is one dated 17.5.202