Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Rina Saha vs All India Institute Of Hygiene & Publice ... on 22 May, 2026
1 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024
& O.A. No. 350/205/2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA
O.A. No. 350/1013/2024
(with M.A. No. 350/251/2025)
Date of Hearing: 28.04.2026
O.A. No. 350/205/2026
Date of Hearing: 27.04.2026
Date of Order: 22.05.2026
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Anindo Majumdar, Administrative Member
Hon'ble Mr. Diwakar Singh, Judicial Member
In the matters of:-
1. O.A. No. 350/1013/2024: Rina Saha, Aged 55 Years, W/o
Shri Suvash Ranjan Saha, Group 'C',
Upper Division Clerk, Rural Health
Unit and Training Centre, All India
Institute of Hygiene and Public Health,
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,
Singur, Hooghly-712409. Resident of:
2E1/2, Uttarpara Housing Estate,
Bhadra Kali, 88-B, G.T. Road,
Hooghly-712232.
......... Applicant
-Versus-
UNION OF INDIA through The
Director, All India Institute of Hygiene
and Public Health, Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare, 110, Chita
Ranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700073.
.......Respondents
For The Applicant(s): Mr. T. R. Mohanty; Counsel
For The Respondent(s): Mr. S. Paul; Counsel
2. O.A. No. 350/205/2026: Rina Saha, Aged 55 Years, W/o
Shri Suvash Ranjan Saha, Group 'C',
Upper Division Clerk, Rural Health
Unit and Training Centre, All India
Institute of Hygiene and Public Health,
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,
Singur, Hooghly-712409. Resident of:
2E1/2, Uttarpara Housing Estate,
Bhadra Kali, 88-B, G.T. Road,
Hooghly-712232.
......... Applicant
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and
Training, Phone=
a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d,
Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER=
87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a,
CN=Utkarsh Jha
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
2 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024
& O.A. No. 350/205/2026
-Versus-
UNION OF INDIA through The
Director, All India Institute of Hygiene
and Public Health, Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare, 110, Chita
Ranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700073.
.......Respondents
For The Applicant(s): Mr. T. R. Mohanty; Counsel
For The Respondent(s): Mr. K. K. Ganguly; Counsel
ORDER
Per: Mr. Diwakar Singh, Member (J)
Heard Ld. Counsel on both the sides.
2. Since common questions of fact and law arise in both the Original Applications and the parties are also identical, both the matters are being disposed of by this common order.
3. O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 has been filed challenging the Memorandum dated 29.09.2023 whereby a Major Penalty Charge Sheet came to be issued against the applicant under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The applicant has prayed for the following relief(s):-
"8.1. to allow the present Application;
8.2. to quash and set aside the impugned Major Penalty Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2023 (Annexure: A-1) and all the consequences thereof or declare that the impugned Major Penalty Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2023 (Annexure: A-1) has lapsed;
8.3. to allow exemplary costs of the application; and Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 3 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 8.4. to issue any such and further order/directions this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
3.1. O.A. No. 350/205/2026 has subsequently been filed challenging the order dated 20.01.2025 whereby the applicant was reverted from the post of Upper Division Clerk to the lower post of Laboratory Assistant pursuant to the aforesaid disciplinary proceedings. The applicant has prayed for the following relief(s):-
"8.1. to allow the present Application;
8.2. to quash and set aside the impugned Reversion Letter dated 20.01.2026 (Annexure: A-I) 8.3. to consequently, direct the Respondent to restore the Applicant to the position of Upper Division Clerk with effect from 20.01.2026;
8.4. to grant all consequential benefits of the same, including full salary and allowances of the higher post of Upper Division Clerk;
8.5. to direct the Respondent to pay the arrears of salary and allowances of the higher post of Upper Division Clerk to the Applicant within a specified time, with compound insterest; 8.6. to allow exemplary cost of application; and 8.7. to issue any such and further orders this Tribunal deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case"
FACTS OF THE CASE
4. The applicant joined the respondent's Institute on 13.12.1990 as Laboratory Attendant in Group 'D' post. At the time of her appointment, her educational qualification was Class VIII passed. Subsequently, the applicant applied for permission to pursue Secondary School Examination from the Bihar School Examination Board, which was granted by the respondents vide letter dated Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 4 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 14.03.1994. Pursuant thereto, the applicant appeared in the Secondary School Examination conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board in 1995 and obtained the matriculation certificate. The applicant had availed Earned Leave from 15.05.1995 to 24.05.1995 (Annexure A/6 to O.A. No. 350/1013/2024) for the purpose of appearing in the said Secondary School Examination. The said educational qualification certificate was duly submitted by the applicant to the respondents on 12.11.1999 (Annexure A/6 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024) and it formed the basis for her promotion to the post of Lower Division Clerk on 18.08.1997 and later to the post of Upper Division Clerk on 10.10.2018.
4.1. Records further reveal that the issue relating to the applicant's educational qualification had also earlier been examined internally by the Vigilance Wing of the respondent Institute and a communication dated 11.03.2008 (Annexure A/4 to O.A. No. 350/205/2026) was addressed by the Vigilance Officer to the Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, wherein it was specifically noted that upon verification from the Bihar School Examination Board, the allegations against the applicant did not appear to be true and the matter was liable to be dropped.
4.2. Subsequently, a complaint was received by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) regarding certain officials, including the applicant, upon which the CVC referred the matter to the Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 5 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 Ministry of Health and Family Welfare vide letter dated 05.08.2019 (Annexure R/4 to O.A. No. 350/1013/2024). The said letter, which required the respondents to investigate the matter and forward a detailed report, is reproduced hereunder:-
"के ीय सतकता आयोग CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION FTS: 1462668/US(vig)/2019 No. Conf/9192/19/428260 िदनां क/ Dated 05/08/2019 OFFICE MEMORANDUM Sub. Complaint against officials of All India Institute of Hygiene and Public Health, Kolkata (M/o HFW).
A copy of complaint dated NIL received in the Commission on the above cited subject is enclosed. On scrutiny of the complaint, it is seen that the allegations mentioned in the complaint have a vigilance angle and, therefore, need to be investigated.
2. In view of the above, the Central Vigilance Commission in exercise of powers conferred on it under Section 8 (1) (d) and Section 8 (1) (h) of the CVC Act 2003 hereby directs that an investigation be conducted into the complaint. The detailed investigation report along with the Department's specific comments/recommendations on each of the allegations may be submitted to the Commission within 12 weeks of receipt of this order.
3. The receipt of this order may be acknowledged. -sd-
(Ramawatar Meena) Director Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, (Sh. Alok Saxena, (VO), 901, Chandralok building, Janpath New Delhi-110001."
{Emphasis supplied} 4.3. Pursuant thereto, the concerned Ministry forwarded the matter to the respondents for investigation vide letter dated 19.09.2019 (Annexure R/4 to O.A. No. 350/1013/2024). The said communication is also reproduced as under:-
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 6 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 " Government of India Ministry of Health & Family Welfare Directorate General of Health Services (Medical Education Section) Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi Dated the 19th September 2019.
To, The Director, All India Institute of Hygiene & Public Health, 110, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700073 Sub: Complaint against officials of All India Institute of Hygiene & Public Health (ΑΠΗ&ΡΗ), Kolkata. -regarding.
Sir, I am directed to forward a copy of the complaint dated NII. on the above mentioned subject, received from the Central Vigilance Commission with the request to get investigation the allegations mentioned in the complaint and forward the detailed investigation report, in a sealed cover, along with attested relevant copies of documents/files and with the specific comments/recommendations on each of the allegations, latest by 25.9.2019 without fail. As the complaint is made under 'Whistle blower Act', the identity of the complainant is not being disclosed. Encl: As above.
Yours faithfully, (S.K. Tanwar) Deputy Director(ME)"
{Emphasis supplied} 4.4. Thereafter, a Major Penalty Charge Sheet dated 03.02.2020 (Annexure A/2 to O.A. No. 350/1013/2024), along with corrigendum dated 14.02.2020, came to be issued against the applicant. The same was challenged before this Tribunal in O.A. No. 350/543/2020. By order dated 12.08.2020 (Annexure A/4 to O.A. No. 350/1013/2024), this Tribunal directed the respondents to ascertain from the Bihar School Examination Board regarding the genuineness of the certificates submitted by the applicant and to take an appropriate decision thereafter. Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 7 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 4.5. Thereafter, the respondents initiated verification proceedings and initiated correspondence with the Bihar School Examination Board, vide letters dated 02.12.2020 and 14.12.2020 (Annexure R/5 & R/6 respectively to O.A. No. 350/1013/2024), seeking clarification regarding the applicant's candidature and certificate.
The content of the letter dated 02.12.2020 reads as under:-
"GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF HYGIENE AND PUBLIC HEALTH 110, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700073 Phone-033-22413954, 22412888 Emall [email protected] No. E. 12-8/2020 Date: 02.12.20 To, The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Budh Marg, Fraser Road Area, Patna 800001 Sub: Court Case at CAT, Calcutta Bench being OA No 1163 of 2020 in the matter of Smt. Rina Saha-Vs-Union of India Ref: Letter no 7490 dated 15.10.2020 of Bihar School Examination Board Sir, In reference to the above mentioned court case in CAT, Calcutta Bench and in reference to Your office letter dated 17.06.2013 (copy enclosed) your good office is requested to inform us the following:
1) whether Smt. Rina Saha was a regular or a private candidate under Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
2) whether Smt. Rina Saha being a domicile of West Bengal, was eligible to appear in Madhyamik Pariksha examination 1995 from Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
3) Admit card of Smt. Rina Saha shows her mother tongue as Hindi which needs to be verified and confirmed.
Although your office informed this Institute about the roll no., father's name, date of birth, year of passing, marks obtained, division etc. of Smt. Rina Saha, the above Information as asked for in para 1) and 2) are not supplied by your office. Since a new case in CAT, Calcutta Bench D.A. No. 1163 of 2020 has been filed, your good office is hereby requested to supply the information as asked for in para 1) and 2).
All the above information may please be sent to the earliest, preferably within one week by retum email.
All correspondences may be done to the emails as noted below: Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 8 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026
1) [email protected]
2) [email protected] Yours faithfully
-sd-
ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR"
4.6. Whereas, the content of the letter dated 14.12.2020 reads as under:-
"GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF HYGIENE AND PUBLIC HEALTH 110, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700073 Phone-033-22413954, 22412888 Emall [email protected] No. E. 12-8/2020 Date: 14.12.20 To, The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Budh Marg, Fraser Road Area, Patna 800001 Sub: Court Case at CAT, Calcutta Bench being OA No 1163 of 2020 in the matter of Smt. Rina Saha-Vs-Union of India Ref: Letter no No. E. 12-8/2020dated 15.10.2020 of Bihar School Examination Board Sir, In reference to the above mentioned court case in CAT, Calcutta Bench and in reference to your office letter dated 17.06.2013 (copy enclosed) your good office was requested to inform us the following vide our office letter dated 02.12.2020:
1) whether Smt. Rina Saha was a regular or a private candidate under Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
2) whether Smt. Rina Saha being a domicile of West Bengal, was eligible to appear in Madhyamik Pariksha examination 1995 from Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
3) Admit card of Smt. Rina Saha shows her mother tongue as Hindi which needs to be verified and confirmed.
However your office has not issued any clarification regarding the above till now. Proper disposal of the above court case and its associated enquiry process depends on the above clarification as requested from your office All the above information may please be sent to the earliest, preferably within one week by return email.
All correspondences may be done to the emails as noted below:
1) [email protected]
2) [email protected] Yours faithfully
-sd-
ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR"
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 9 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 4.7. In response, the Bihar School Examination Board, vide its letter dated 24.12.2020, confirmed that the applicant had appeared in the Secondary School Examination, 1995 as a private candidate and that the records verified her appearance in the said examination. The said letter dated 24.12.2020 is reproduced hereunder:-
"BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA Letter No-K-234/2020 K-1683 Date 24-12-2020 From, Controller of Examination (Secondary), Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
To, Additional Director, Government of India Office of The Director, All India Institute of Hygiene & Public Health, 110, Chittranjan Avenue, Kolkata.
Subject: Court Case at CAT, Calcutta Bench being OA No 1163 of 2020 in the matter of Smt. Rina Saha-Vs-Union of India.
Reference: Letter No. E.12-8/2020 dated-02.12.2020 Sir, With reference to your above letter, it is to inform you that pertaining to Smt. Reena Saha, Roll code-4181, Roll no. 212 has been verified with records of 1995 in Board. It reveals that Smt. Reena Saha, Roll code-4181, Roll no. 212 had appeared as private candidate in the Annual Secondary Examination 1995.
2. So far as domicile of said candidate is concerned, there is no bar for resident of other states for appearing in the matriculation exam conducted by B.S.E.B. However, they should fulfil the conditions laid down in chapter IV of Bihar School Examination Board Regulation 1964 (Copy enclosed). It is further made it clear here that in records there is no provision of entry of domicile of any candidate.
3. It is also to point out here that ther is no provision of entering the mother language of candidates. However, in the secondary examination there is column of MIL (Mother Indian Language). Smt. Reena Saha, Roll No. 212, Roll Code-4181 had appeared in the Annual Secondary Examination 1995 opting HND (HINDI) as her MIL..
4. It is further to draw your attention towards the Office Letter No. 7490, Dated- 15.10.2020 mentioned as reference in your letter, does not relate to Smt. Reena Saha.
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 10 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 Yours faithfully,
-sd-
Controller of Examination (Secondary) Bihar School Examination Board, Patna"
4.8. In the aforesaid communication, the Bihar School Examination Board further clarified that there was no prohibition in respect of her appearance in the said examination. Despite such clarification, the respondents withdrew the earlier Charge Sheet dated 03.02.2020, vide memorandum dated 23.08.2023, and issued a fresh Major Penalty Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2023 (Annexure A/1 to O.A. No. 350/1013/2024), which came to be challenged in O.A. No. 350/1013/2024. The respondents have alleged therein that applicant had obtained the said educational qualification in contravention to the applicable regulations governing the Bihar School Examination Board and had thereby improperly secured the benefit of the said qualification in service. The said charge memorandum is reproduced herein below:-
"No. E.9-1/93/02 भारत सरकार / GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ा एवं प रवार क ाण मं ालय/MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE अ खल भारतीय ा िव ान और जन ा सं थान/ ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF HYGIENE & PUBLIC HEALTH Office of the Director/िनदे शक का कायालय Establishment Branch 110, C R Avenue, Kolkata 700 073 Dated, the 29th September, 2023 MEMORANDUM/CHARGESHEET The undersigned proposed to hold an inquiry against Smt. Rina Saha, UDC, under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The substance of Imputations of misconduct in Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 11 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 respect of which the Inquiry is proposed to be held is set out in the enclosed Statement of Articles of Charge (Annexure-1). A statement of the imputations of misconduct in support of each article of charge is enclosed (Annexure-II). A list of documents by which the charges are proposed to be sustained are also enclosed (Annexure -III). List of witnesses by whom the articles of charges framed against Smt. Rina Saha, UDC are proposed to be sustained is also enclosed (Annexure IV). Smt. Rina Saha, UDC is directed to submit within 10 days of the receipt of this Memorandum a written statement of her defense and also to state whether she desires to be heard in person.
Smt. Rina Saha, UDC is further informed that an inquiry will be held only in respect of those articles of charge as are not admitted. She should, therefore, specifically admit or deny each article of charge.
Smt. Rina Saha, UDC is further informed that if she does not submit her written statement of defense on or before the date specified in second para above, or does not appear in person before the inquiry authority or otherwise falls or refuses to comply with the provisions of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1065 or the orders/directions issued of the said Rule, the Inquiry authority may hold the inquiry against her ex- parte.
Attention of Smt. Rina Saha, UDC is invited to Rule 20 of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 under which no Government servant shall bring or attempt to bring any political or outside influence upon any superior authority to further her interest in respect of matter pertaining to her service under the Government. If any, representation is received on her behalf from another person in respect of any matter dealt with in these proceedings, it will be presumed that Smt. Rina Saha, UDC is aware of such a representation and that it has been made at her instance and action may be taken against her for violation of Rule 20. The receipt of the Memorandum may be acknowledged. Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 12 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 Director िनदे शक, AllH & PH Director ALIH & P.H., अ. भा. ा. िव.एवं जन ा. सं"
Annexure-I
1) Smt Rina Saha has acquired her certificate of Secondary School Examination from Blinar School Examination Board in 1995 by fraudulent means.
2) Smt Rina Saha has acquired her appointment as LDC, w.e.f. 18-08-1997 on the basis of the qualifications as specified in the first para as above, and therefore her appointment as LDC as well as UDC in All India Institute of Hygiene and Public Health, Kolkata becomes Invalid ab initio due to the reasons as mentioned in para 1 as above.
Annexure-II
1) As per records received that Smt. Rina Saha appeared the Secondary School Examination from Bihar School Board In the year of 1995 and submitted a photo copy of Mark Sheet, Certificate and Registration Receipt for the same to this Institute (Exhibit No. 2,3&4),
2) As per Bihar School Examination Board Regulation, 1964, the Eligibility of Private candidate for Secondary School Examination is as follows,
a) A candidate who has not attended any recognised secondary school as pupil at any time during one year Immediately preceding the examination in which she wants to appear may be admitted to the Board's Secondary School Examination as a private candidate,
b) Such private candidates as have not been resident in the State for at least one year immediately prior to the Secondary School Examination will not be permitted to appear at the Board's Examination, unless they are the sons/daughters or wards of Government servant transferred from another State within that period, Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 13 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026
c) In order to be eligible for appearing at the Secondary School Examination, such private candidates shall have to pass a preliminary test examination held at any Government Secondary School or other Secondary School appointed by the Director of Public Instruction for the purpose,
d) Such candidates shall also have to produce e certificate of good conduct from a respectable person of the locality to the satisfaction of the Head of the Institution concerned,
e) The private candidate shall have to register himself/herself in the Board under Article 22 of Chapter IV of this regulation (Exhibit No. 5),
3) As per Bihar School Examination Board Examination Regulation, 1964, a regular candidate is supposed to take admission in a school and attend the classes in the school regularly (Exhibit No. 5),
4) Smt. Rina Saha, In view of the Regulations as noted in para 2 and 3 above, neither fulfils the condition of being a regular candidate, nor the condition of being a private candidate, since she joined in AIIH & PH, Kolkata on 01-06-1984 and continuing till now. Since by virtue of her service In AllH & PH, Kolkata she is domicile of West Bengal and hence legally she is neither eligible as a Regular Candidate nor a Private Candidate (Exhibit No. 5)
5) As Indicated in letter No. K-234/2020-K-1683 dated 24.12.2020 of Bihar School Examination Board it is evident that Smt. Rina Saha appeared as Private Candidate in Annual Secondary Examination 1995 (Exhibit No. 1),
6) As indicated in copy of the Registration Receipt (Exhibit No. 4) submitted by Smt. Rina Saha, and Exhibit No. 1, she appeared in the examination as a private candidate,
7) As indicated in the Para 5 and 6 as above, it is evident that she appeared in Annual Secondary Examination 1995 as Private Candidate and acquired the Certificate in Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 14 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 illegal manner, since she is not eligible to appear in the examination as private candidate vide extant rules (Exhibit No. 5),
8) From the documents mentioned in Para 1 and Para 2(C) it is evident that she passed preliminary test examination from S.C. High School, Biratpur, Saharsa, Bihar (Exhibit No. 2,3 & 4),
9) It appears from record that Smt. Rina Saha obtained the permission from the Director, AIIH & PH, Kolkata from appearing in examination 1994 vide this Office Order No. A.8-32/89 dated 10-03-1994 and applied for EL from 15-05-1995 to 24-
05-1995 and Office Order for grant of her EL was issued vide No. E.12-04/93 (pt) dated 15-06-1995. From the above it is not clear whether she had taken the above mentioned EL for appearing in preliminary Test Examination from her school in Saharsa, Bihar or for appearing in Bihar School Examination Board (Exhibit No. 6 &
7). Annexure-III
1. Copy of Letter No. W-K-234/2020-K-1683 dated 24-12-2020 of BSEB (Exhibit No.1).
2. Copy of Mark Sheet of Secondary School Examination BSEB (Exhibit No. 2).
3. Copy of Certificate of Secondary School Examination BSEB (Exhibit No. 3)
4. Copy of Registration Receipt of Secondary School Examination BSEB (Exhibit No. 4).
5. Copy of Rule of Bihar Board under Article 22 of Chapter IV of this Regulation (Exhibit No. 5),
6. Copy of Office Order No. A.8-32/89 dated 10-03-1994 (Exhibit No. 6),
7. Copy of Office Order No. E.12-04/93 (pt) dated 15-06-1995 (Exhibit. No. 7) Annexure-IV
1. Controller of Examinations, Bihar School Examination Board, Budh Marg, Budh Vihar, Fraser Road Area, Patna-800001.
2. Vigilance Officer, Bihar School Examination Board, Budh Marg, Budh Vihar, Fraser Road Area, Patna-800001."
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 15 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 4.9. During the pendency of O.A. No. 350/1013/2024, and, while the matter was already in the course of final hearing and was ultimately reserved for orders, along with another connected matter, on the earlier occasion, the respondents proceeded to issue the impugned order dated 20.01.2025 (Annexure A/1 to O.A. No. 350/205/2026) reverting the applicant from the post of Upper Division Clerk to Laboratory Assistant. Consequently, the applicant filed O.A. No. 350/205/2026 challenging the said order of reversion.
4.10. It is also relevant to note that while hearing O.A. No. 350/205/2026, this Tribunal had recorded its displeasure, vide order dated 16.02.2026, regarding the fact that neither side had brought to the notice of the Tribunal that the purported final order in the disciplinary proceedings had already been passed and implemented despite the earlier O.A. challenging the Charge Sheet having already been heard and reserved for orders.
CONTENTIONS OF THE APPLICANT
5. Learned Counsel for the applicant in O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 submits that the impugned Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2023 is wholly unsustainable in law inasmuch as no specific violation of any provision of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 has been alleged therein. It is argued that the respondents have sought to conduct a roving and fishing enquiry into the alleged violation of the applicable regulations and eligibility criteria of the Bihar School Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 16 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 Examination Board, which is wholly outside the scope of disciplinary jurisdiction under the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. 5.1. It is further argued that the Bihar School Examination Board itself has already confirmed the genuineness of the certificate and has further clarified that there existed no bar against the applicant appearing in the examination. Therefore, once the competent Examination Board itself accepted the candidature and confirmed the result, the respondents could not sit in appeal over the rules, procedures or eligibility conditions of the Examination Board. 5.2. It is further contended that the issue had already been examined by the Vigilance Wing of the respondent Institute in the year 2008 itself and the allegations were not found sustainable. It is, therefore, submitted that the respondents could not repeatedly reopen the same issue after decades, particularly, when the applicant had already earned promotions on the basis of the said qualification and the respondents themselves had accepted the same for all service purposes.
5.3. Learned Counsel for the applicant further submits that the respondents have acted in a predetermined and mala fide manner by suppressing the communication dated 24.12.2020 of the Bihar School Examination Board before this Tribunal in the earlier proceedings and thereafter withdrawing the earlier Charge Sheet only to issue a fresh Charge Sheet on substantially similar allegations after a lapse of three years in the year 2023. Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 17 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 5.4. It is further submitted that there has been an inordinate delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings, since the certificate was obtained in 1995 and was relied upon by the respondents themselves for granting promotions. The applicant also contends that the disciplinary proceedings have been initiated merely on the basis of a complaint without proper application of mind and without any conclusive material establishing misconduct. 5.5. In respect of O.A. No. 350/205/2026, Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order dated 20.01.2025 amounts to reduction in rank and major penalty within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution of India and Rule 11 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. It is argued that the said order is wholly non-speaking and has been passed in complete violation of the mandatory procedure contemplated under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.
5.6. Learned Counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance upon Office Memorandum dated 13.07.1981 issued by the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms regarding the requirement of reasoned and speaking orders in disciplinary matters and has argued that the impugned order of reversion does not disclose any independent reasoning whatsoever. 5.7. Learned Counsel for the applicant further submits that even assuming the respondents entertained any doubt regarding the educational qualification of the applicant, the same could not have resulted in a unilateral order of reversion after nearly three Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 18 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 decades of service, without proper adjudication and without establishing any fraud or misrepresentation attributable to the applicant.
5.8. Learned Counsel for the applicant has relied upon a series of judicial pronouncements in support of the applicant's case, particularly, on the scope and limits of disciplinary jurisdiction, the requirement of identifiable misconduct under service jurisprudence, and the impermissibility of sustaining disciplinary proceedings on mere suspicion or disputed interpretation of external regulations. Reliance has, inter alia, been placed upon the judgments in U. Das vs. Union of India (O.A. No. 288 of 2015), Tushar Ranjan Mohanty vs. Union of India (O.A. No. 3020 of 2016 and connected proceedings), M.R. Diwan vs. Union of India (O.A. No. 1645 of 2017), Union of India vs. J. Ahmed (AIR 1979 SC 1022), Roop Singh Negi vs. Punjab National Bank [(2009) 2 SCC 570], M.V. Bijlani vs. Union of India [(2006) 5 SCC 88], Inspector Prem Chand vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi [(2007) 4 SCC 566], and the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in Khagendra Nath Pal vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. [(1997) 12 CAL CK 0006] in support of the contention that disciplinary proceedings cannot be sustained in absence of cogent proof of misconduct and that departmental authorities cannot enlarge the scope of enquiry beyond their lawful jurisdiction. Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 19 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS
6. The respondents, on the other hand, contend that although the Bihar School Examination Board has confirmed the applicant's appearance in the examination as a private candidate, the clarification received from the Board raised serious doubts regarding the applicant's eligibility under the Bihar School Examination Board Regulations, 1964 and that the respondents were competent to initiate disciplinary proceedings once doubts arose regarding the manner in which the applicant had obtained and utilized the educational qualification in question. 6.1. The respondents state that specific clarifications were sought from the Bihar School Examination Board regarding - (i) whether the applicant was a regular or private candidate, (ii) whether she was eligible to appear in the examination being a domicile of West Bengal, and (iii) whether the details in her admit card regarding mother tongue required verification.
6.2. It is argued on behalf of the respondents that though the Bihar School Examination Board verified the certificate, the issue before the respondents was not limited merely to genuineness of the certificate but also extended to the legality and permissibility of the applicant appearing in the examination as a private candidate while being a resident of West Bengal.
6.3. The respondents submit that the disciplinary proceedings have been initiated to ascertain whether the applicant suppressed material facts to obtain eligibility and derive service benefits. The Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 20 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 respondents contend that the applicant obtained promotions on the basis of a qualification which according to them ought not to have been recognized and, therefore, disciplinary action was justified.
6.4. In O.A. No. 350/1013/2024, the respondents have also contended that judicial interference at the stage of charge memorandum is limited, and reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Kunisetty Satyanarayana, (2006) 12 SCC 28, wherein it has been held that ordinarily, courts should not interfere with a Charge Sheet at the threshold, as the disciplinary authority must be permitted to complete the inquiry process. 6.5. In relation to O.A. No. 350/205/2026, Learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the order dated 20.01.2025 was issued consequent upon conclusion of disciplinary proceedings and, therefore, no interference is called for. 6.6. Learned Counsel for the respondents has relied upon the settled principles governing limited judicial interference in disciplinary proceedings and at the stage of charge sheet. Reliance has, inter alia, been placed upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Upendra Singh [(1994) 3 SCC 357] and Secretary, Ministry of Defence vs. Prabhash Chandra Mirdha [(2012) 11 SCC 565], in support of the proposition that courts ordinarily ought not to interfere with Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 21 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 disciplinary proceedings unless the same are shown to be wholly without jurisdiction or ex facie unsustainable in law.
ANALYSIS
7. We have carefully considered the pleadings on record and the submissions made by both parties.
7.1. At the outset, this Tribunal cannot overlook the fact that the applicant had admittedly obtained prior permission from the respondents themselves to appear in the Secondary School Examination conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board. It is also not disputed that the respondents themselves sanctioned leave to the applicant for appearing in the said examination and subsequently accepted the qualification in the service records. 7.2. The records further reveal that the respondents themselves acted upon the said qualification over a prolonged period of time and granted successive promotions to the applicant. Significantly, the issue had also earlier been examined by the Vigilance Wing of the respondent Institute and the allegations were not found substantiated.
7.3. It is also not in dispute that the Bihar School Examination Board, being the competent authority, has verified the records and confirmed, vide letter dated 24.12.2020 (supra), that the applicant had appeared in the Secondary School Examination, 1995 as a private candidate and that the certificate issued to her corresponds with the records maintained by the Board.
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 22 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 7.4. The respondents had raised three specific queries before the Bihar School Examination Board, namely, regarding the nature of candidature, domicile eligibility, and details recorded in the admit card. The Board clarified that the applicant appeared as a private candidate and further clarified that there is no bar on candidates from other states appearing in the examination, subject to conditions prescribed in the applicable regulations, and also clarified that there is no record maintained regarding domicile and that the applicant appeared with Hindi as her Mother Indian Language (MIL) subject. Thus, the genuineness of the certificate itself stands confirmed by the issuing authority. 7.5. However, the respondents have proceeded on the premise that although the certificate is genuine, the applicant may not have been eligible under the applicable regulations to appear in the examination and may have suppressed material facts at the time of registration.
This aspect relates not to the authenticity of the certificate but to the circumstances and eligibility under which the certificate was obtained.
7.6. Hence, the central issue which arises for consideration is whether the respondents, while exercising disciplinary jurisdiction under the CCS (CCA) Rules, could independently adjudicate upon the eligibility conditions and examination norms of the Bihar School Examination Board despite the Board itself having verified the certificate and clarified the position.
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 23 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 7.7. In our considered opinion, the answer has to be in the negative.
Once the competent statutory Examination Board itself confirmed that the applicant had genuinely passed the examination and further clarified that there existed no prohibition regarding her appearance in the examination, the matter stood concluded insofar as the validity and acceptability of the educational qualification was concerned. 7.8. The respondents could perhaps have examined whether any misconduct or suppression attributable to the applicant existed under the CCS (Conduct) Rules. However, instead of confining themselves to the limited scope of departmental disciplinary jurisdiction, the respondents travelled far beyond the same and undertook an independent scrutiny into whether the Bihar School Examination Board ought to have permitted the applicant to appear in the examination at all.
7.9. Such an exercise, in the considered view of this Tribunal, is wholly beyond the scope of the disciplinary proceedings contemplated under the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The respondents cannot sit in appeal over the functioning, regulations or administrative decisions of an autonomous Examination Board, particularly, after the Board itself has verified the qualification.
7.10. We also find substance in the submission advanced on behalf of the applicant that despite the communication from the Ministry requiring submission of an investigation report to the Central Vigilance Commission, the respondents instead embarked upon an independent and prolonged exercise against the applicant without bringing the matter to its proper closure.
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 24 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 7.11. It is noted that the respondents were acting pursuant to a reference received from the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) directing investigation into the matter. The said letter was issued by the CVC in exercise of the powers conferred upon it under Section 8(1)(d) and Section 8(1)(h) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003. The CVC had directed that an investigation be conducted into the complaint and a detailed investigation report, along with the department's specific comments/recommendations on each allegation, may be submitted to the Commission within 12 weeks of receipt of the aforesaid letter.
7.12. The matter thus originated from a complaint forwarded through the vigilance channel under the 'Whistle Blower' framework.
At this juncture, it is also relevant to note that the respondents themselves have annexed, inter alia, the "Handbook for Inquiry Officers and Disciplinary Authorities, 2013" published by the Institute of Secretariat Training and Management, Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India (Annexure R/10 to O.A. No. 350.903/2023). The 'Chapter 8' thereof, dealing with "Action on Investigation Report", specifically delineates the role of the Central Vigilance Commission in matters involving vigilance angle. Clause 3 thereof reads as follows:
"3. What is the role of CVC in making decisions on Preliminary Investigation Reports?
First stage advice of CVC is to be obtained in respect of cases falling under purview of CVC. i.e. following types of cases:
(a) The cases which have been referred by the CVC for report
(b) The cases having vigilance angle and Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 25 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026
(c) Pertaining to Group 'A' officer or a group of officers including a Group A officer."
7.13. The communication dated 19.09.2019 itself contemplated an investigation into the allegations and submission of a detailed report with specific comments/recommendations. However, instead of confining the enquiry to verification of the allegations and placing the matter before the competent vigilance authorities after obtaining clarification from the Bihar School Examination Board, the respondents proceeded to independently adjudicate upon the applicant's eligibility under the Bihar School Examination Board Regulations traversing beyond the proper scope of departmental disciplinary scrutiny.
7.14. In a matter of such complexity involving interpretation of eligibility conditions under regulations of an external examining body, it would have been open to the respondents to seek appropriate clarification or advice from the competent authorities, including the vigilance authorities, based on the clarification received from the Bihar School Examination Board after submitting a detailed report and their comments to the CVC.
7.15. We further find that the impugned Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2023 does not clearly disclose any specific misconduct within the meaning of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964. The entire tenor of the proceedings demonstrates that the respondents were effectively attempting to question the permissibility of the applicant's appearance in the Bihar School Examination Board examination Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 26 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 rather than any identifiable act of misconduct attributable to the applicant.
7.16. This Tribunal is also unable to ignore the extraordinary delay involved in the matter. The applicant appeared in the examination in the year 1995 with due permission from the respondents. The qualification was accepted and acted upon for decades. Promotions were granted on that basis. The respondents themselves remained fully aware of the qualification throughout. 7.17. The disciplinary machinery could not have been invoked after such prolonged delay, particularly in absence of any demonstrable fraud, suppression or misrepresentation attributable to the applicant. 7.18. We further take note of the fact that the earlier Charge Memorandum dated 03.02.2020 was withdrawn by the respondents on 23.08.2023, whereas, the clarification from the Bihar School Examination Board confirming the genuineness of the applicant's qualification and clarifying the relevant position had already been received as far back as on 24.12.2020. Despite such clarification being available on record, the respondents issued the fresh impugned Charge Memorandum only on 29.09.2023 after considerable delay and without any satisfactory explanation forthcoming from the records. Significantly, nothing has also been brought on record to demonstrate that during the intervening period any detailed report, comments/recommendations or further communication was submitted by the respondents to the Central Vigilance Commission pursuant to the original vigilance reference. The aforesaid circumstances lend further support to the applicant's contention that Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 27 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 the respondents continued the matter in an enlarged manner despite the core issue already having been clarified by the competent Examination Board itself.
7.19. This Tribunal has also considered the judicial pronouncements relied upon by the parties. The judgments in Roop Singh Negi (supra), M.V. Bijlani (supra), Inspector Prem Chand (supra) and Union of India vs. J. Ahmed (supra) reiterate the settled principle that disciplinary proceedings must rest upon legally sustainable evidence establishing identifiable misconduct and cannot proceed merely on conjectures, suspicion or inferential assumptions. The decision in Khagendra Nath Pal vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.
(supra), relied upon by the applicant, assumes particular relevance in the facts of the present case inasmuch as the Hon'ble High Court therein deprecated an attempt by departmental authorities to sit in judgment over matters falling within the domain of the competent educational/examining authority itself. In the present case also, despite the Bihar School Examination Board specifically verifying the genuineness of the applicant's qualification and clarifying the relevant position, the respondents continued to independently adjudicate upon the permissibility of the applicant's appearance under the Board Regulations, thereby traversing beyond the proper scope of departmental scrutiny.
7.20. The judgments relied upon by the respondents in Upendra Singh (supra) and Prabhash Chandra Mirdha (supra) indeed lay down the limited scope of judicial interference in disciplinary matters. However, the present case stands on a distinguishable footing, since Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 28 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 the interference herein is not premised upon re-appreciation of evidence but upon the foundational issue that the respondents, while exercising disciplinary jurisdiction under the CCS (CCA) Rules, travelled beyond their lawful domain and proceeded on issues which properly fell within the jurisdiction of the Bihar School Examination Board itself.
7.21. Coming now to the impugned order dated 20.01.2025 challenged in O.A. No. 350/205/2026, we find that the same results in civil consequences of the gravest nature inasmuch as the applicant has been reverted from the post of Upper Division Clerk to Laboratory Assistant after decades of service.
7.22. Such reduction in rank undoubtedly attracts the protection of Article 311 of the Constitution of India, as well as, the mandatory safeguards contemplated under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.
7.23. Upon perusal of the impugned order dated 20.01.2025, we find the same to be cryptic, non-speaking and devoid of proper reasoning.
Though the disciplinary authority has discussed the factual backdrop and concurred with the findings of the Inquiry Officer, the said order does not address the specific and foundational objection raised by the applicant that the disciplinary proceedings had travelled beyond the permissible scope of departmental enquiry and had virtually undertaken an adjudication upon the validity and recognition of the qualification issued by the Bihar School Examination Board, which issue did not fall within the respondents' adjudicatory domain. Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 29 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 7.24. The order is also conspicuously silent as regards the effect and implication of the Vigilance Officer's communication dated 11.03.2008 recommending closure of the matter, as well as, the absence of any material showing cancellation or invalidation of the applicant's qualification by the competent educational authority. In that sense, the impugned order suffers from lack of adequate and reasoned consideration on the core jurisdictional objections raised by the applicant.
7.25. The Office Memorandum dated 13.07.1981 issued by the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms clearly mandates that disciplinary orders must be reasoned and speaking orders possessing the attributes of quasi-judicial determination. 7.26. The impugned order fails to satisfy the aforesaid requirement.
More importantly, once the very foundation of the disciplinary proceedings, namely, the impugned Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2023, is found unsustainable, the consequential order dated 20.01.2025 also cannot survive.
CONCLUSION
8. We are, therefore, of the considered view that the respondents have travelled beyond the permissible scope of departmental jurisdiction and have sought to adjudicate upon matters which properly fell within the domain of the Bihar School Examination Board itself.
8.1. This Tribunal is conscious that judicial interference at the stage of charge sheet is ordinarily limited. However, where the charge sheet Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 30 O.A. No. 350/1013/2024 & O.A. No. 350/205/2026 ex facie discloses lack of jurisdiction, absence of identifiable misconduct and where the continuation of proceedings amounts to abuse of process, interference becomes necessary to secure the ends of justice.
8.2. In the facts of the present case, continuation of the impugned disciplinary proceedings would amount to permitting the respondents to continue a roving enquiry into issues already settled by the competent Examination Board itself.
8.3. Accordingly, the impugned Major Penalty Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2023 issued against the applicant is quashed and set aside.
Consequently, the impugned order dated 20.01.2025 passed against the applicant pursuant to the said disciplinary proceedings is also quashed and set aside.
8.4. The respondents are directed to restore the applicant to all consequential service benefits flowing from the aforesaid findings, in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8.5. Both the Original Applications stand allowed. Pending M.A., if any, shall also stand disposed of. There shall however be no order as to costs.
(Diwakar Singh) (Anindo Majumdar)
Member (J) Member (A)
UJ
Digitally signed by Utkarsh Jha
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Department of Personnel and Training, Phone= a851c6412cda6db52ed568d6ca110c6700616c4ebefeb5b49203412a39d11b0d, Utkarsh Jha PostalCode=700020, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 87702d895f8f8d9e54f67b1d9ffc368bb1bac7172b7b88641da0dc7e71dd7d0a, CN=Utkarsh Jha Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.05.22 14:44:11-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0