Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. The respondents in their reply have refuted the allegation of the applicant that the charges levelled against him were not established and that a wrong order of punishment is passed against him. They have contended inter alia that on a surprise check by the vigilance inspector shortage in cash of Rs. 40/- was found from the applicant and therefore, it was the case of temporary misappropriation of the Government money. It was also found by the vigilance inspector that the applicant had given two berths to two passengers excluding the claim of RAC ticket holders and that on inquiry it was learnt that both the berths were given to these persons by accepting bribe from them. The applicant was, therefore, given charge sheet. Ultimately in inquiry, he was found to be guilty of both the charges by the inquiry officer. He was, therefore, imposed with the penalty of removal from service by the disciplinary authority which was subsequently in appeal reduced to reduction in rank for three years by the appellate officer. They have denied that the copies of the documents relied upon in the inquiry were not supplied to the applicant and that the inquiry was conducted against the principle of natural justice. They have supported the punishment imposed on the applicant and have prayed that the application be dismissed with costs.