UOI Vs. MANJEET SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MINOR penalty of withholding next increment of pay for a period of one year has been inflicted upon the respondent by the disciplinary authority. The Appellate Authority has agreed with the penalty levied. Vide impugned order dated 06.07.2006, allowing O.A.No.1335/2005, the Tribunal has set aside the penalty on the ground that Rule 14(18) of the CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 was not followed, in that since the charged officer did not examine himself in defence, the circumstance appearing against him were to be put to him by the inquiry officer. Additionally, finding fault, the Tribunal has held that the report of Station Security Officer relied upon by the inquiry officer was not permissible for the reason the Station Security Officer had not been examined as a witness.

(2.) A stitch in time saves nine, is the adage which we had been hearing since childhood. Had the disciplinary authority been alive to this and put one stitch in time the problem at hand would not have arisen.

(3.) THE reply filed by the respondent to the charge against him was as under: