Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89043 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5153 of 2025 Petitioner :- Atul Anand Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.K. Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Abhishek Srivastava,Brajesh Pratap Singh,C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. 1. Heard Shri R.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondent No.1 and Ms. Kritika Sinha, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents No. 2 and 3. 2. The petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 05.06.2023 passed by the respondent No.2 and the order dated 12.03.2024 passed by the respondent No.3 awarding penalty of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect has been imposed upon the petitioner. 3. The only submission raised by Shri R.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the authorities did not adopt the procedure known to law while dispensing with his services. The petitioner was not given an opportunity to examine any departmental witnesses. In fact no departmental witness was produced before the Enquiry Officer. 4. Ms. Kritika Sinha, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents No. 2 and 3 has fairly called attention to the averments in the counter affidavit which admits to the fact that no departmental witness was examined in the enquiry proceedings. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. The following facts are established from the record and upon exchange of pleadings. 7. The departmental witnesses were not produced before the Enquiry Officer to bring home the charges against the petitioner. The petitioner was hence never given an opportunity to examine the said witnesses. 8. In the facts of this case, the introduction of the departmental witnesses was imperative for proving the charges against the petitioner as per applicable standards of evidence in the departmental enquiry proceedings. 9. The enquiry proceedings are vitiated and hence the impugned orders cannot be sustained. The order of the appellate authority fares no better, inasmuch as, it fails to redeem the illegality committed by the impugned order of dismissal. 10. In this wake, the impugned order dated 05.06.2023 passed by the respondent No.2 and the order dated 12.03.2024 passed by the respondent No.3 are liable to be set aside and are set aside. 11. The matter is remitted to the respondents authority with the following directions:- i) The petitioner shall be given list of departmental witnesses who are proposed to be examined and also provided with copies of adverse materials which are to be relied upon against him. ii) The Enquiry Officer shall set specific dates for the enquiry proceedings and intimate the same to the petitioner in advance thereof. iii) The department shall produce relevant departmental witnesses in the enquiry proceedings. The petitioner shall be given an opportunity to cross-examine the said witnesses. iv) The petitioner shall cooperate in the enquiry proceedings. v) The enquiry proceedings shall be concluded within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 12. All other dues and entitlements of the petitioner shall be determined after the result of the enquiry proceedings. 13. Writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Vandit Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad