Proceedings must be just, fair, and reasonable, and the principle of natural justice is integral. Promotions without caste mention and unfair punishment violate constitutional rights.

JUDGMENT :

RAMESH CHANDRA KHULBE, J.

1. In this petition, petitioner has prayed to issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the dated 09.06.2020 and order dated 08.07.2020 (Annexure-12 and 13 respectively to the writ petition).

2. Briefly put, facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on 24.09.1984 as Assistant Teacher, Government Girls Inter College, Kotdwar. Before her retirement, a charge-sheet dated 05.01.2018 was issued against her. The petitioner denied all the charges vide her reply dated 05.02.2018. Vide relieving order dated 31.07.2018, the petitioner retired as Principal, Girls Inter College, Namjala, Pithoragarh. After her retirement, an inquiry was set up nominating one - Bhupinder Singh Negi as the inquiry officer.

3. The petitioner remained present before the Inquiry. She was supplied with the copy of the charge-sheet (a questionnaire and documents). Vide application dated 21.02.2019, the petitioner sought information about status of the inquiry against her. In reply to the said application, a note-sheet was provided on 13.03.2019 in which the inquiry report was mentioned. The petitioner, vide her explanation dated 23.03.2019, had mentioned that none of the charges were made out against her and her entire retiral dues had wrongly been withheld. Again, a show-cause notice dated 25.04.2019 was issued against the petitioner.

4. The said show-cause notice was again duly replied through registered post on 01.05.2019. When her retiral benefits were wrongly withheld, she filed a W.P. (SB) No. 399 of 2019, Kamini Verma vs. State of Uttarakhand. The said writ-petition was disposed of on 29.08.2019 with the direction to finalise the payment of retiral benefits as well as to conclude the disciplinary inquiry within two months.

5. Since, no compliance of order dated 29.08.2019 was being made by the respondent authority, accordingly, the petitioner preferred Contempt Petition No. 71 of 2020, Kamini Verma vs. R. Meenakshi Sundaram and Others. In reply, the respondent no. 1 issued a letter dated 09.06.2020 to the writ-petitioner wherein it has been mentioned that the inquiry officer has found that the petitioner belongs to OBC but she has been promoted under SC quota while many senior teachers are still working on the post of Principal. Consequently, the promotion order dated 26.07.2013 relating to the petitioner was cancelled. Accordingly, the recovery order of Rs. 13,33,688/- has been issued vide letter dated 08.07.2020. Hence, the present writ-petition has been preferred.

6. The respondent no. 2 and 4 filed a counter affidavit and submitted that the Director, School Education vide its order dated 02.11.2001 promoted the petitioner as Lecturer on temporary basis in which her caste is shown as scheduled caste (SC). Thereafter, she was promoted vide order dated 01.07.2008 on the post of Head Mistress in which her caste is shown as SC. Again vide order dated 28.05.2010, the petitioner was promoted as Downgrade Principal in Government Inter College in which the caste of the petitioner is again shown as SC, but the petitioner never brought this fact into the notice of the Department. She was given promotion against SC Category.

7. The counter affidavit further mentions that vide letter dated 25.04.2019, the inquiry report was submitted by the inquiry officer. Accordingly, opportunity of hearing was given to her. Thereafter, inquiry report along with representation and other relevant documents were sent to Uttarakhand Public Service Commission with a proposal of State Government vide its letter dated 29.11.2019. The Uttarakhand Public Service Commission vide its letter dated 22.05.2020, submitted to the State Government, granted its approval and proposal of punishment. Ultimately, the State Government vide its memorandum dated 08.06.2020 passed the impugned order.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

9. From the record, it is clear that a charge-shee