Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Central Administrative Tribunal vs The Union Of India on 11 December, 2012
1 OA.374/2008CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI.
O.A.No.374/2008.
Date of decision : December 11, 2012.
Coram: Hon'ble Shri Justice A.K. Basheer, Member (J) Hon'ble Shri R.C. Joshi, Member (A).
V.R. Korial, Ex-Stores Assistant 'B', 40, Kamble Building, Wanowrie Gaon, Pune 411 040. .. Applicant.
( By Advocate Shri S.P. Saxena ).
Versus
1. The Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, DHQ, Post Office, New Delhi 110 011.
2. The Director General, Research and Development, Directorate of Personnel (Per.-10), 'A' Block, D.R.D.O. Bhawan, New Delhi 110 011.
3. The Director, High Energy Materials Research Laboratory, Sutarwadi, Pune-21. ..Respondents ( By Advocate Shri P.P. George proxy for Shri R.R. Shetty ).
Order (Oral) Per : R.C. Joshi, Member (A).
In the present Original Application the Applicant has impugned order dated 05.03.2007 passed by the Appellate Authority and order dated 24.08.2006 passed by the Disciplinary Authority.
2 OA.374/20082. Briefly, the Applicant in the present O.A. while working in Welfare Section of High Energy Materials Research Laboratory (HEMRL), Pune as Stores Assistant 'B' was issued a charge-sheet dated 22.07.2004 for disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and the Inquiry Officer submitted his report dated 02.06.2006 in which the charges framed under the Articles of Charge Nos.I,II,III,IV,V and VI were established as proved. The Disciplinary Authority after considering the records of the case, findings of the Inquiry Officer and the representation of the Applicant dated 21.06.2006 imposed the penalty of removal from service vide order dated 24.08.2006. The Applicant preferred an appeal vide dated 06.12.2006 which was considered by the Appellate Authority and the same was rejected vide order dated 05.03.2007 against which the present Original Application has been preferred.
3. The Applicant in the present Original Application has challenged the penalty imposed on him by the Disciplinary and Appellate Authorities on the ground that the defence assistant appointed by the Applicant and as approved by the Inquiry Officer was not made available which resulted in depriving him of an effective defence opportunity. It has also been stated that the penalty imposed on the Applicant is 3 OA.374/2008 disproportionate and the Appellate Authority had not given him a personal hearing.
4. The Applicant has sought the following reliefs:(
a) to allow the Original Application,
(b) to quash and set aside the impugned order dt. 05.03.07 and 24.08.06, passed by Respondent Nos.2 and 3 respectively,
(c) to pass any other appropriate orders which may be just and equitable,
(d) to award the cost of Original Application.
5. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel on behalf of the Applicant has filed an M.A.No.942/2012 in which it was brought on record that the Applicant in the present O.A. had died on 15.03.2012 and it was pleaded to bring the legal heirs of the deceased Applicant on record. The legal heirs of the deceased Applicant were accordingly brought on record.
6. We have gone through the pleadings, carefully considered the papers on record and have extensively heard the rival sides.
7. It is seen from the case papers that the deceased Applicant had joined HEMRL as Stores Keeper with effect from 18.08.1987 and was subsequently promoted as Sr.Stores Keeper with effect from 4 OA.374/2008 03.06.1996. The post was redesignated and called as Store Assistant 'B'. The records further reveals that the Applicant was cautioned/warned by the Disciplinary Authority on several occasions and in support of their contention, the Respondents have placed on record, ExR- 1, Ex-R-2, Ex-R-3, Ex-R-4(a), Ex-R-4(b), Ex-R-4(c), Ex-R-4(c), Ex-R-4(d), Ex-R-5 and Ex-R-6. The deceased Applicant was thereafter issued a charge-sheet vide dated 22.07.2004 containing the following Articles of Charge:
ARTICLE OF CHARGE I: That the said Shri VR Korial, while functioning as Store Assistant 'B'(SA 'B') during his current tenure in Welfare Section of HEMRL has forged the signature of Shri MPC Rao, Assistant Labour Welfare Commissioner (Central), HEMRL, Pune with his Designation Seal and also with Govt. Departmental Round Seal on the Housing loan application pertaining to Employer's Certificate in respect of housing loan application dated 5/12/2003 submitted by him to M/s Vysya Bank Housing Finance Limited off F.C. Road, Pune.
The above said act of forgery committed by Shri V.R. Korial, SA 'B' amounts to gross misconduct under CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 in addition to being an offence under THE INDIAN PENAL CODE.
By the above said act, Shri V.R. Korial, SA 'B' failed to maintain absolute integrity and exhibited a conduct highly unbecoming of a Govt. Servant and thereby contravened Rule 3 (1)(i)&(iii) of CCS(Conduct) Rules, 1964.
ARTICLE OF CHARGE II: That during the aforesaid period and while functioning in the aforesaid office, the said Shri V.R. Korial, Store Assistant 'B' has forged the signature of Shri MPC Rao, Assistant Labour Welfare Commissioner (Central), HEMRL, Pune with his 5 OA.374/2008 Designation Seal and Govt. Departmental Round Seal of HEMRL, Pune on the Part-II of the loan application (File No.2215) dated 9 April 2003 which was submitted to M/s Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited, Ghole Road, Pune, as reported to Director, HEMRL, Pune, by Shri MPC Rao, Assistant Labour Welfare Commissioner (Central), HEMRL, Pune vide his letter No.HEMRL/Legal/VRK dated 22/12/2003.
The above said act of forgery committed by Shri VR Korial, SA 'B' amounts to gross misconduct under CCS(Conduct) Rules 1964 in addition to being an offence under INDIAN PENAL CODE.
By the above said act, Shri VR Korial SA 'B' failed to maintain absolute integrity and exhibited a conduct highly becoming of a Govt. Servant and thereby contravened Rule 3 (1)(i)&(iii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964.
ARTICLE OF CHARGE III : That during the aforesaid period and while functioning in the aforesaid office the said Shri VR Korial, Store Assistant 'B' has un-authorisedly removed/stolen the official Designation Seal along with another official seal bearing the name of Shri MPC Rao, ALWC(C), HEMRL, Pune and also the Govt. Departmental Round Seal of HEMRL, Pune to cause forgery and obtain loans from various Banks and financial Institutions.
By the above said act Shri VR Korial, SA 'B' failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and exhibited a conduct highly unbecoming of a Govt. servant and thereby contravened Rules 3(1)(i)(ii)&(iii) of CCS(Conduct) Rules 1964.
ARTICLE OF CHARGE IV : That during the aforesaid period and while functioning in the aforesaid office, the said Shri VR Korial, Store Assistant 'B' has drawn an advance of Rs.11,780/-to avail LTC to 'Kulu Manali' but failed to submit the adjustment bill of LTC within one month and refund the amount if any, remaining unutilized or otherwise as per rules, thereby committing misuse of LTC advance in continuation of his absenteeism 6 OA.374/2008 thereafter.
By the above said act Shri VR Korial, SA 'B' failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and exhibited a conduct highly unbecoming of a Govt. servant and thereby contravened Rule 3(1)(i)(ii)&(iii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964.
ARTICLE OF CHARGE V : That the said Shri VR Korial, Store Assistant 'B' (SA 'B') during the aforesaid period and earlier also while functioning in HEMRL, Pune has taken loans from various Banks/Financial Institutions as per the list enclosed and failed to repay the installments of loan. Due to non payment of monthly installments of loans taken by Shri VR Korial, SA 'B' some of the said Banks/Financial Institutions have reported this matter of default to this Laboratory for recovery of their dues through recovery orders, thereby Shri VR Korial, SA 'B' has failed to manage his private affairs i.e. Financial matters within his authorised sources of income habitual defaulter in respect of loans taken from various Banks/Financial Institutions. By the above said act, Shri VR Korial, SA 'B' failed to maintain absolute integrity and exhibited a conduct highly unbecoming of a Govt. Servant and thereby contravened Rule 3 (1)(i)(iii) of CCS(Conduct) Rules 1964.
ARTICLE OF CHARGE VI : That during the aforesaid period and while functioning in the aforesaid office, Shri VR Korial, Store Assistant 'B' (SA 'B') has been unauthorisedly absenting from duty w.e.f. 27/12/2003 without any prior intimation or sanction of leave, and thereby rendering his utility as redundant in Government service. The above said act of unauthorised absence of Shri VR Korial, SA 'B' amounts to gross misconduct under CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964.
By the above said act Shri VR Korial, SA 'B' failed to maintain devotion to duty and exhibited a conduct which is highly unbecoming of a Government Servant and thereby contravened Rule 3(1)(i)(ii) & (iii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964.
7 OA.374/20088. An inquiry was ordered and the Inquiry Officer vide his report dated 02.06.2006 clearly established that the charges framed against the deceased Applicant in respect of Article of Charges I,II,III,IV,V & VI were proved taking into account the documentary and oral evidence placed before the Inquiry Officer. Perusal of the inquiry report reveals that the report given by the Inquiry Officer is reasoned and the inquiry was conducted in accordance with principles of natural justice and proper opportunity was given to the Applicant to defend his case.
9. We have also perused the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority vide dated 24.08.2006 and we find that the order is reasoned and has been passed after considering the defence of the Inquiry Officer's report, representation dated 21.06.2006 given by the deceased Applicant and taking into account all the relevant documents on record. Further, considering the serious nature of the charge alleged and then established in the report of the Inquiry Officer, we do not find that the penalty imposed on the Applicant is excessive.
10. We have also considered the order passed by the Appellate Authority and we find that the Appellate Authority has considered all the issues raised by the 8 OA.374/2008 deceased Applicant in his appeal dated 06.12.2006 and has addressed the same. We have also find that the order passed by the Appellate Authority is reasoned. It is also noted that the Appellate Authority has considered the penalty imposed by the Disciplinary Authority and has concluded that the same is appropriate and meets the ends of justice.
11. In view of the above, therefore, the charges against the deceased Applicant being grave, departmental inquiry was conducted and in accordance with the recommendations given by the Inquiry Officer and after considering the representation given by the Applicant and the facts and circumstances of the case, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the penalty of removal from service which was confirmed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 05.03.2007. We have also find that due procedure as prescribed has been carefully followed in this case and the deceased Applicant had participated in the inquiry proceedings and, therefore, nothing survives in the present case.
12. In view of the above, therefore, we find that the case is bereft of merit and hence the same is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(R.C. Joshi) (Justice A.K. Basheer) Member (A) Member (J).
H. OA.374/2008