AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
Heard.
The petitioner at the relevant point of time was working on the post of Assistant Engineer. He alleged to have made an application for grant of
higher pay scale. It is the case of the Electricity Board that the application was not made and he made false claim leading to initiation of enquiry and
leading to passing of impugned order dated 10-3-2003 directing withholding of two annual increments with non- cumulative effect against which the
petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority and thereafter preferred this writ petition claiming higher pay scale as well as setting aside
the order passed by the competent authority.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently submit that the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in law. The petitioner has made
application for grant of higher pay scale and instead of granting higher pay scale, he was punished with the aforesaid order which deserves to be set
aside.
Learned counsel for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that appeal filed by the petitioner is pending consideration.
No employee is entitled to attack one impugned order by filing departmental appeal as well as by filing writ petition, such a course is clearly
impermissible in law. In fact, the writ petition is not maintainable, but considering the fact that respondent No.1 has also not decided the appeal,
respondents No.1 and 2 - the competent appellate authority is directed to consider and decide the appeal of the petitioner so preferred within two
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after hearing both the parties and take a final decision in this regard. It is made clear that the
Court has not expressed any opinion on merits.
The writ petition stands finally disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No order as to cost(s).