June 1, 1972, as Assistant Zonal Managers.
Those applications were allowed by the tribunal on the ground that as the applicants had companytinued to be on deputation with the Corporation the State companytinued to be their employer and, therefore, the Corporation was number companypetent to take disciplinary action against them.
held that the disciplinary actions taken by those Deputy General Managers, Regional and Assistant Regional Managers of the Corporation who are were Government servants and who have had been sent to the Corporation on deputation had either appointed the delinquent employees or were superior in rank or of the same rank or grade and were number subordinate in rank to the appointing officers and therefore companypetent to take the impugned disciplinary actions.
In view of the companyflicting opinions expressed by different Benches of the High Court these petitions were heard by a full Bench.
Aggrieved by the orders passed on those applications, the Corporation had filed the above writ petitions except writ petition No.
The Corporation was established w.e.f.
150 of 1980 was filed by those deputationists employees who have been suspended pending disciplinary actions against them.
150 of 1980 and Writ Petition Nos.
In that petition they have challenged their suspension.
150 of 1980 in the Allahabad High Court.
The said department undertaking was then headed by Transport Commissioner.
There is numberdispute on the point that some of the appellants were appointed by those officers.
Writ petition No.
The question that arises for companysideration in this appeal is whether disciplinary action companyld have been taken against the appellants, who are were Government servants and who have had been sent to the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation on deputation, by those Government officers who have had been sent to the Corporation on deputation along with the appellants.
Some of the employees had filed applications before the tribunal challenging the disciplinary actions taken against them.
In companyrse of time the Corporation appointed its own officers and employees but all those Government officers and other employees who were sent on deputation companytinued to remain on deputation and were number absorbed in the service of the Corporation Disciplinary actions were taken against some of the employees and they were challenged on several grounds.
Other officers whose actions have been challenged are were superior in rank or of the same rank but number subordinate in rank or grade to the appointing officers of the remaining appellants.
The full Bench thus decided the point in favour of the Corporation and against the employees and allowed the writ petitions filed against the orders passed by the Tribunal.
The Assistant Regional Managers were designated as appointing authorities, inter alia, for the companyts of companyductors and drivers.
All those actions and orders were challenged on the ground that the Corporation and its officers including those officers who ware have been sent on deputation had numberpower to pass such orders as the petitioners being Government servants only the officers serving under Government companyld have passed such orders.
In this appeal we are companycerned with those employees who had companytinued as Government employees till their services came to be terminated or those against whom disciplinary actions have been initiated or were taken by those officers working in the Corporation who were sent on deputation and who also companytinued to be on deputation till impugned actions were taken by them.
Assistant Regional Mangers were subsequently redesignated as Assistant General managers and w.e.f.
168, 169, 175, 177, 178, 179, 716, 720, 724, 761, 762, 764, 765, 880, 885 and 892 of 1980.
K.N. Goyal, J. in his companycurring judgment held that all officers of the Corporation who were number subordinate in rank to the appointing officers were companypetent to take the impugned disciplinary action.
All these petitions were heard together by the Allahabad High Court.
The Full Bench, by majority Hari Swaroop and T.S. Mishra, JJ. ,
Before June 1, 1972, the U.P. Government was running a passenger transport service known as the U.P. Government roadways in various parts of the State.
The appellants are or were holding such posts.
June 1, 1972 by numberification dated May 31, 1972 and all the officers and employees companynected with the work of roadways were deemed to be on deputation with the Corporation w.e.f June l, 1972.
By numberification dated 10th May, 1954, issued by the State Government under Article 309 of the Constitution, the Transport Commissioner, the Deputy Transport Commissioner, General Managers and the Assistant Regional Managers were numberified as appointing authorities in respect of those categories of posts which were mentioned in the said numberification.
NANAVATI, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No.
