Judicial review of disciplinary matters is limited, with courts respecting the wide discretion of disciplinary authorities unless procedural fairness is violated or penalties shock the conscience.

JUDGMENT :

Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. Heard Sri Ratan Deep Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the State-appellants and Sri Ajay Kumar Singh Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-opposite party.

2. The present intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 27.05.2024 passed by learned Single Judge of the Court in Writ Appeal No. 5001 of 2024 [ Prem Chandra Verma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others ].

3. A perusal of the records of the case indicates that the writ petition had been instituted praying for a mandamus to be issued to the Joint Director, Technical Education, East Zone, Varanasi to implement the benefit of revised salary to the petitioner, in terms of memoranda dated 28.05.2022 and 07.07.2022 issued by the Director, Technical Education, U.P. and addressed to the Joint Director, Technical Education, East Zone, Varanasi, amongst others.

4. Before the writ court, it was contended that the emoluments payable to the petitioner in his capacity as Principal of a Government Polytechnic College had been revised in terms of Government Order dated 03.05.2018 and the consequential orders dated 28.05.2022 and 07.07.2022 issued by the Director, Technical Education, U.P. Kanpur directing issuing directions to the Joint Director, Technical Education, Varanasi. It was urged that despite the aforesaid Government Order dated 03.05.2018 and the orders issued by the Director dated 28.05.2022 and 07.07.2022 fixing revised emoluments for Principals of Government Polytechnic Colleges, the Joint Director was not revising the petitioner's emoluments. Noticing the aforesaid contention, the writ court passed an order on 01.04.2024 directing filing of a personal affidavit by the Joint Director showing cause as to why the revised emoluments in terms of the orders passed by the Director, Technical Education had not been sanctioned and disbursed to the petitioner.

5. The Joint Director, Technical Education, in compliance of the aforesaid order filed his affidavit wherein it was stated that an order dated 04.04.2024 had been passed granting the petitioner the benefit of the revised emoluments as per the orders dated 28.05.2022 and 07.07.2022. The writ court, upon noticing that the order dated 04.04.2024 showed that while determination for different periods of time from 02.05.2018 to 02.01.2024 had been made, for the period when the petitioner was under suspension, i.e. 11.03.2019 to 04.01.2021, the petitioner's increments had not been granted, making it dependent on the outcome of the pending departmental proceedings against the petitioner, observed that mere pendency of disciplinary enquiry would not disentitle the petitioner from earning his increment and accordingly a further personal affidavit of the Joint Director, was ordered to be filed. A further personal affidavit of the Joint Director was filed on 18.04.2024, wherein the stand taken that the orders regarding pay fixation and award of increment or the payments of subsistence allowance shall be taken after the disciplinary proceedings come to an end, was held to be unacceptable, and an order was passed directing the Principal Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Government of U.P., Lucknow, the Director of Technical Education, U.P. Kanpur and the Financial Controller, Technical Education, Kanpur, to ensure that a decision was taken on or before 02.05.2024. An Affidavit of C