LALIT PRATAP SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition (S) has been preferred against the order dtd. 17/12/2014 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, bench Jabalpur (in short 'CAT'), by which, petitioner's Original Application No. 603/2011 has been dismissed. The application was filed for quashing and setting aside of the order dtd. 27/7/2004 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Durg Division, whereby penalty of removal from service was imposed upon the applicant and order dtd. 18/3/2005 (Annexure P-3) and order dtd. 23/12/2010 (Annexure P-4), whereby his appeal and revision petition were, respectively, rejected.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed to the post of Postal Assistant on 19/11/1997 at Head Post Office, Rajnandgaon. On 12/6/2000, he was transferred to Sub-Post Office, Sector 6, Bhilai, as Postal Assistant. It is alleged that for the period from 12/6/2000 to 3/1/2002, some financial irregularities were pointed out against the petitioner and others, causing loss to the respondent-department. Therefore, the petitioner was issued a charge-sheet dtd. 2/9/2002 for the misconduct committed by him while working as Postal Assistant in Sector 6, Bhilai, alleging that while working on the said post, he had shown withdrawal amounting to Rs.40,000.00 and accounted for in PO account on 17/8/2001, in the SB Account No. 420887 without verifying the entries in the ledger and without comparing the signature of the depositor with the specimen signature book and had allowed withdrawal of Rs.70,000.00and Rs.60,000.00 on 1/1/2001 and 10/4/2001, respectively, without verifying the entries in the ledger in the SB Account No. 421650, which was already transferred on 24/7/1997. He had also shown half withdrawal and accounted for in PO Account amounting to Rs.21,000.00 on 1/1/2001 in the recurring deposit A/c No. 163083, which was already closed on 26/11/1998. In RD Account No. 163864, he had shown half withdrawal and accounted for in PO Account on 17/11/2000 amounting to Rs.18,000.00, in which half withdrawal was already made. In other RD Account, he had shown withdrawal and accounted for in PO Account amounting to Rs.24,300.00, which was already closed on 7/5/1999. Thereafter, an inquiry officer was appointed, who after full fledged inquiry, submitted his report on 11/5/2004 to the disciplinary authority, holding the charges proved against the petitioner. After supply of inquiry report, the petitioner submitted his representation against said inquiry report and after considering his representation and other material, the disciplinary authority vide order dtd. 27/7/2004 (Annexure P-2) imposed major penalty of removal from service, on the petitioner. The appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected by the appellate authority vide order dtd. 18/3/2005 and the revision filed by the petitioner was also rejected by the revisional authority i.e. Chief Post Master General, Chhattisgarh vide order dtd. 23/12/2010. Thereafter the petitioner filed Original Application No. 603/2011 before the CAT, which was also rejected by the impugned order. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) The grounds raised by the petitioner in this petition are that the departmental inquiry has been conducted without following the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner has not been provided proper opportunity of hearing. Further, since the petitioner has been held responsible by respondent No. 5 only for the loss of Rs.21,150.00, on being compelled, he had deposited the said amount with the department. Despite that, he has been imposed major penalty i.e. removal from service, which amounts to double jeopardy to the petitioner. Lastly, considering the loss caused to the respondents-department, for which petitioner has been held responsible, aforesaid penalty imposed upon him is disproportionate. Hence, he prayed for grant of relief as sought for in the petition.