Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sh. Jai Bhagwan Sharma vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 18 August, 2011
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi.
OA-24/2011
New Delhi this the 18th day of August, 2011.
Honble Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J)
Honble Dr. A.K. Mishra, Member (A)
Sh. Jai Bhagwan Sharma,
S/o Sh. Omkar Dutt Sharma,
R/o A-295, Prashant Vihar,
Delhi-85. . Applicant
(through Sh. S.K. Gupta, Advocate)
Versus
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
through its Chief Secretary,
Delhi Secretariat,
I.P. Estate, Delhi.
2. The Principal Secretary (Education),
Directorate of Education,
Old Secretariat,
Delhi-54.
3. The Director,
Directorate of Education,
Old Secretariat,
Delhi. . Respondents
(through Mrs. P.K. Gupta, Advocate)
O R D E R
Dr. A.K. Mishra, Member (A) The applicant is seeking a direction to quash the impugned order of penalty imposed on him by the Disciplinary Authority (DA) and the order of the Appellate Authority (AA) by which the penalty was confirmed and consequential benefits.
2. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is a case of no evidence, inasmuch as the Inquiry Officer (IO) after going through the evidence placed on record held that there was no evidence to establish the charges brought against the applicant.
2.1 The applicant was working as Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) (English) in Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School, Prashant Vihar, Delhi; he quarrelled with one of his colleagues which culminated in an FIR being lodged against him alleging assault and causing physical hurt. Although the applicant was chargesheeted by the police, ultimately both the teachers worked out a compromise on the basis of which the Honble High Court quashed the FIR and the criminal proceedings emanating therefrom.
2.2 Nevertheless, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the applicant. The charges levelled against the applicant are extracted below:-
ARTICLE-I That Sh. Jai bhagwan Sharma, TGT (English), while working in Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School, Prashant Vihar, Delhi quarreled with Sh. S.P. Goel, TGT (SSc) of the said school after closing of the school on 08-07-1999. He physically assaulted him in a savaged manner and gave teeth bites on his body parts causing several serious injuries to Sh. S.P. Goel, TGT (SSc) and a result of that he was hospitalized in Santom Hospital, Prashant Vihar, Delhi in a critical condition.
The above act of Sh. Jai Bhagwan Sharma, TGT (English)) is an example of sheer moral turpitude of a Government Servant especially of a teacher. By indulging in such a vulgar act, Sh. Jai Bhagwan Sharma, TGT (English) has acted in a manner which is unbecoming of a Govt. servant in violation of the provisions of Rule 3 (1) (III) of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.
ARTICLE-II That Sh. Jai Bhagwan Sharma, TGT (English), while working in Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School, Prashant Vihar, Delhi quarreled with Sh. S.P. Goel, TGT (SSc) of the said school after closing of the school on 08.07.1999. He physically assaulted him in a savaged manner and gave teeth bites on his body parts causing several serious injuries to Sh. S.P. Goel, TGT (SSc) and a result of that he was hospitalized in Santom Hospital, Prashant Vihar, Delhi in a critical condition.
On the complaint of Sh. S.P. Goel, TGT (SSc), a Criminal case FIR No.235/99 Dated 08-07-99, U/S 324/506 IPC was registered against Sh. Jai Bhagwan Sharma at Police Station, Prashant Vihar, Delhi.
ARTICLE-III That Sh. Jai bhagwan Sharma, TGT (English), while working in Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School, Prashant Vihar, Delhi was arrested by the Police Authorities of Prashant Vihar Police Station and remained in Police Custody/Judicial Custody for more than 38 hours from 09-07-99 to 11-07-99 before having been released on bail on 12-07-99.
3. It may be seen that the first charge related to the assault on Sh. S.P. Goel, TGT and giving him teeth bites causing serious injuries leading to Goels hospitalization. Sh. Goel gave a statement before the IO that there was a quarrel between him and the applicant and both of them have compromised the matter and he had no interest in raking up an old issue relating to a time 9.5 years in the past. The only prosecution witness Sh. S.S. Rawat, the Principal does not say that he saw any visible mark of injury on Sh. S.P. Goel. He only asked both the teachers to maintain peace and harmony among the teaching staff. There is no evidence on record to suggest that Sh. S.P. Goel was hospitalized on account of injuries sustained during the brawl; neither is there any evidence to suggest that the applicant bit him.
4. The other two charges relate to the same allegations but admittedly about the FIR which was registered against the applicant U/S324/506 IPC dated 08.07.1999, his subsequent arrest and being kept in police custody for more than 48 hours. It is the admitted position that the FIR has since been quashed by the Honble High Court. Logically it would mean that the FIR does not exist. When the FIR is no longer there, any action which was taken such as the arrest and police custody of the applicant on the basis of such an FIR would also lose its relevance.
5. In these circumstances, we feel that there was no infirmity in the finding of the IO that the charges could not be established against the applicant as there was no evidence. The DA in his disagreement note has mentioned about the inquiry not being conducted properly. If that be so, he should have referred the matter back for further inquiry from that stage. Instead of doing so, the DA issued disagreement note. Though DA has the right to disagree but it has to be based on some evidence which comes on record in the inquiry. We have already noted above there was no evidence on the basis of which he could give a finding that the charges were established against the applicant.
6. As a result, we are not in a position to sustain the impugned orders which are accordingly set aside and the O.A. is allowed. The applicant would be entitled to all consequential benefits. No costs.
(Dr. A.K. Mishra) (Mrs. Meera Chhibber) Member (A) Member (J) /vinita/