The court ruled that retrospective application of disciplinary action removing MACP benefits is illegal if it conflicts with prior acquittal, as it violates principles of fairness and statutory authority.

JUDGMENT :

RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

"(i) Issue a directions, order or writ in the nature of CERTIORARI thereby set-aside/quash the letter/order dated 03.04.2023, which is being annexed as Annexure No.-1 to this Writ Petition.

(ii)Issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the opposite party concerned to grant the benefit of MACP-I and MACP-II to the applicant in view of order dated पी/लख/254/ dated 14.12.2010 since 01.09.2006 (issued by opposite party एमएसीपी/10 No.-2) and order dated dated 24.01.2019 पी/लख/254/ एमएसीपी/18/2046 (issued by opposite party no.-2)."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed in the security department in the North-Eastern Railway Lucknow Division, Lucknow, on 27/11/1983, and after rendering 39 years, 7 months, and 3 days of service, he got superannuated on 30/06/2023.After superannuation, the petitioner's Pension Payment Order was issued, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure No. 3 to the petition. The petitioner completed all assignments entrusted to him by his superior authorities with full devotion and dedication . During his service period, the petitioner was falsely implicated in Case No. 268 of 1993, under section 3 of the R.P.(UP) Act at Police Station RPF (MG) District- Gonda, which was registered as State versus Ram Raksha and others. However, after due adjudication, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Railway, Gonda, finally decided the said criminal case on 10/08/2001, whereby the petitioner was acquitted in the said case . A copy of the judgment of the trial court dated 10/08/2001 has been filed as Annexure No. 4 to the petition. The service record of the petitioner was throughout blamless, except in the said case in which he was falsely implicated.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide letter no. dated 03.04.2023 passed by respondent no.-2, पी/लख/254/एमएसीपी/4/23 the benefit of MACPS (First MACP since Dated 16.11.2012 and Second MACP since Dated 16.11.2022) had been reduced in the Level 04 @ Rs. 2400/- and in the Level 05 @ Rs. 2800/- respectively.

7. He further submits that in view of the litigation in pay scale, MACP I and MACP-II, the petitioner's benefits have already been affected, which is a gross violation of Section 300A of the Constitution of India. Once he has been acquitted of all the criminal charges by the trial court, the question of his suspension is not sustainable.

8. He next submitted that the acquittal order in criminal case was passed on 10/08/2001, but afterwards, the respondents deliberately resumed the departmental inquiry and appointed an inquiry officer on 05/11/2002, and accordingly, the impugned order was passed on 01/03/2004, which was passed in the following manner:-

9. He also submits that while passing the aforesaid order dated 01/03/2004 same set of facts and evidence were taken in the departmental proceedings, which were already taken in a criminal proceeding and there is no difference between the two. Hence, after acquittal of the petitioner of the criminal charges, continuing the departmental inquiry and awarding punishment therein against the petitioner is totally illegal, unjust, and arbitrary. Moreover, the order dated 3/4/2023 was passed in the aforesaid matter on the verge of the petitioner's retirement/ superannuation, i.e. 30/06/2023, wherein the effect of the order dated 1/3/2004 has been applied r