Ram Adhar vs U.P. Public Service Tribunal and Others

M. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel.

This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order of the U. P. Public Service Tribunal dated 16.12.1992 Annexure-8 to the writ petition. By that order the claim petition of the petitioner has been dismissed by the Tribunal as barred by time. The petitioner was dismissed from service on 20.6.1977 and he filed a claim petition before the Tribunal in 1990, i.e., after 13 years. Hence, the petition was rightly dismissed as barred by time.

Apart from the above, we find from a perusal of the order dated 16.6.1975 Annexure-1 to the writ petition that the petitioner was found guilty of embezzlement of Rs. 16,020 but strangely enough by the order dated 17.6.1977 he was reinstated vide Annexure-2 to the petition but his service was again terminated on 20.6.1977. It has been held by the Supreme Court that if a person is guilty of embezzlement, the only punishment can be dismissal and the argument that the embezzlement was of a small amount is wholly irrelevant vide Municipal Committee, Bahadurgarh Vs. Krishan Behari and others,

For the reasons given above, this is not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition is dismissed.