TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (12) TMI 1077
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....annual increments permanently of the petitioner and censure entry has been awarded to him and the order dated 08.05.2002, by which, the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed. 3. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Clerk in the Sales Tax Department. At the relevant time, he was posted as 'Head Clerk' in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax (Special Investigation Branch), Gonda, who by order dated 09.11.2000 suspended the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the suspension order in Writ Petition No. 6675 (SS) of 2005, in which suspension of the petitioner was stayed. Later on, a charge sheet was served upon the petitioner on 17.04.2001, in which, eight charges were leveled against him. During inquiry, charge nos. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner himself, are most polite words and not indecent words against superior officers. The Inquiry Officer through his report dated 28.07.2001 held that the Registers were not produced before him during the inquiry, as such, Charge nos. 1 and 2 are proved. In respect of charge no. 5, it has been held that the petitioner has not given any information regarding the case of M/s. Rajesh Traders, as such, as such Charge no. 5 was also proved. In respect of charge no. 8, it has been held that the words "" written in the representation, were written as a warning to the superior officers and were words of indecent language. Accordingly, the petitioner was held guilty. 5. In pursuance of the inquiry report, a show cause notice has been issued to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 01.12.2001, found guilty to the petitioner of the charges no. 1, 2, 5 and 8 and awarded punishment of withholding two increments, permanently and censure entry in character roll of the petitioner. The petitioner filed an appeal from the aforesaid order which has been dismissed by order dated 08.05.2002. Hence, this writ petition has been filed. 6. The counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as Charge nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, the Registers were maintained and were lying in the Gonda Office. The petitioner has made a special request to the disciplinary authority to get it verified from any responsible officer, but the disciplinary authority has not taken any step in this respect. The petitioner was an employee and it was n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nor any warning has been given to them. The impugned orders have been mechanically passed without application of mind, although the charges were not proved at all. 7. I have considered the arguments of counsel for the parties and examined the record. So far as Charge nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, the petitioner in his reply to the show cause notice has clearly mentioned that these registers are available in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax, Gonda and it may be verified by any officer. But the Disciplinary Authority has not taken any step to get the fact verified from the office of Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax, Gonda. It is well established that the charges are required to be proved by positive evidence led by the department a....