Court-fixed timeline for disciplinary proceedings revokes suspension on expiry but permits continuation; punishment vitiated if show-cause reply ignored – Remit for fresh order on technical grounds.

JUDGMENT :

Amitabh Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Shri S. M. Ryokwar, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri Anirudh Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-petitioners and Shri Ajay Shankar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking the relief for quashing the judgment and order dated 18.04.2023 passed by the State Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Petition No.1708 of 2022 “Anshul Jagannath vs. State of U.P. and another”.

3. Brief facts of the present case are that an inquiry was conducted by the Special Investigation Branch (SIB) Unit of the department with respect to the period when the sole respondent, Anshul Jagannath was posted as Assistant Commissioner (Mobile Squad), Commercial Tax at Unnao. The SIB Unit, during the inquiry, found that 22 iron scrap-loaded vehicles without any documents were present at M/s Jagdamba Metallise, Unnao on 02.03.2021, but the respondent failed to take any action and was, therefore, found prima facie guilty of negligence and slackness in the discharge of his duties.

4. The respondent was suspended vide order dated 27.04.2021 and disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him under the U.P. Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 1999”). The Additional Commissioner Grade-I, Commercial Tax, Lucknow, was appointed as Enquiry Officer.

5. A charge sheet dated 29.06.2021 was issued against the respondent, containing three charges, which are as follows:

(I) Charge No. 1: At the factory of the aforesaid firm, 22 vehicles loaded with raw material of iron scrap were found standing outside and goods worth more than Rs. 50,000/- were found without an e-Way bill, in violation of Rule 138B of the UPGST Rules, 2017. However, during the posting of the respondent at the Mobile Squad, Unnao from 07.09.2020 to 02.03.2021 (the date of inspection), no such vehicles for inward or outward supply were addressed by the respondent, indicating connivance on his part. Accordingly, the sole respondent was found guilty of violating Rule 3 of the U.P. Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956, for failing to carry out his responsibilities and duties with absolute integrity and devotion to duty.

(ii) Charge No. 2: On 10.03.2021, the sole respondent detained a passenger bus for inspection and found that some goods were being illegally transported. However, he did not take any action. The respondent spoke with the owner of the bus over the mobile phone and allegedly bargained to provide him an illegal benefit. The audio clip of the conversation between the sole respondent and the bus owner was broadcast on the news channel “Nav Bharat Times”. Accordingly, the sole respondent was found guilty of violating Rule 3 of the U.P. Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956.

(iii) Charge No. 3: After detaining the aforesaid passenger vehicle, the sole respondent sent an SMS to the departmental server with a delay of two hours and Interception No.554963 was received from the server. Further, the order in Form GST MOV-02 for verification of goods loaded on the vehicle was issued with a delay of seven hours. In this manner, the sole respondent violated Circular No.1819010, dated 09.05.2018, as he did not ensure compliance with the instructions contained therein. This indicates indiscipline and a disregard for government instructions.

6. The sole respondent submitted his reply to t