The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, recently overturned the dismissal of an Additional Private Secretary in the Uttar Pradesh Secretariat. The officer, Amar Singh, had been sacked for unintentionally forwarding a WhatsApp message that contained criticism of the Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister. The court found the punishment excessively harsh and highlighted procedural lapses in the inquiry process.
Case Background
In July 2018, Amar Singh, serving as an Additional Private Secretary, mistakenly forwarded an objectionable WhatsApp message on a group where he was the administrator. The message criticized caste-based appointments at Gorakhpur University by the CM and Deputy CM. Realizing his error, Singh immediately deleted the message, asked group members to do the same, and submitted a written apology to the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh.
Despite these actions, a disciplinary inquiry was initiated. Although Singh admitted to forwarding the message unintentionally, the inquiry concluded with his dismissal in September 2020, citing misconduct.
Court Observations and Findings
- Lack of Malicious Intent
Justice Alok Mathur observed that Singh’s actions were not driven by malice. Singh’s admission of the mistake and his immediate corrective steps demonstrated that his intent was not to defame the government. The court emphasized:
“The punishment should have been more lenient, such as an adverse entry in his service records or a censure. His actions, though careless, were not malicious.”
- Procedural Violations
The court identified significant procedural flaws in the inquiry process:
- A technical committee was formed without notifying Singh, violating principles of natural justice.The inquiry failed to establish any evidence that the forwarded message was widely read or circulated.The disciplinary authority relied on speculative claims instead of substantive evidence, rendering the decision arbitrary.
The court also highlighted the improper constitution of the technical committee, stating:
“The technical committee was unnecessary and conducted ex-parte, violating Rule 9(2) of the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999.”
- Disproportionate Punishment
The court ruled that the dismissal was disproportionate to the offense. It stated that disciplinary actions should balance fairness with the gravity of the misconduct. Justice Mathur noted:
“The punishment awarded to the petitioner was shockingly disproportionate to the inadvertent mistake on his part.”
Court’s Verdict
The Allahabad High Court quashed Singh’s dismissal order and directed his reinstatement with all consequential benefits. It also instructed the state government to impose a minor penalty, such as a warning or censure, considering Singh’s admission and the lack of evidence of harm caused by the message.
The court concluded:
“A more proportionate response would have been appropriate given the circumstances. The petitioner’s honesty in admitting the mistake should have been considered.”
Implications of the Judgment
The case underscores the importance of fairness and adherence to principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings. It also highlights the need for proportionality in punishment, particularly when the intent behind the action is not malicious.
Singh’s reinstatement sets a precedent for handling similar cases, ensuring that government servants are treated fairly and that disciplinary actions are based on substantive evidence rather than assumptions.
Case Details
- Case Title: Amar Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Administration Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others
- Case Number: WRIT - A No. - 9071 of 2024
- Bench: Justice Alok Mathur
