AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
We have heard learned Counsel for the appellant. The order of minor punishment of "censure" has been passed against the appellant after giving him an opportunity of hearing and after considering his explanation.
It was found that as a result of failure on the part of the petitioner/ appellant to perform his duties properly, the circuit breaker was non-functional. It has been recorded in the punishment order that if the circuit had been functional, electric flow into the system would have automatically/ instantaneously stopped when the 11 KV line snapped, and the tragedy of death of 29 persons might have been avoided or at least reduced.
In view of these findings, the appellate authority as well as the learned Single Judge were correct in not interfering with the order of minor punishment awarding a "censure" entry to the appellant.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has argued that the said entry loses its force after three years and therefore, the appellant should be granted promotion to the post of Chief Engineer.
We have examined the record of the writ petition. There is no such prayer. The prayer in the writ petition is that the failure to promote the petitioner/appellant in the year 2002, on the ground of the aforesaid censure entry dated 5th March, 2002 should be quashed and the petitioner/appellant should be granted promotion with effect from 2002. This pleading does not support the arguments advanced. In the year, 2002 three years had not elapsed and therefore the censure entry was in full force.
It may be clarified here that in view of the above, we have not examined the effect of the entry after the lapse of three years.
We therefore, dismiss this appeal, as being without merit.