INDIA TRADE PROMOTION ORGANISATION Vs. P K JINDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 2nd February, 2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench in TA No. 511/2009 titled as P.K. Jindal Vs. Union of India and Ors. quashing the order dated 8/9th June, 2000 passed by the Disciplinary Authority imposing penalty of withholding three increments of pay with cumulative effect and granting opportunity to the petitioner to proceed against the respondent after allowing him the assistance of a defence assistant from the stage when he was denied the services of the defence assistant and directing the petitioner to complete the inquiry within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of order dated 2nd February, 2010 as 15 years had already expired.

(2.) BRIEF facts to comprehend the controversies between the parties are that the respondent was appointed as Assistant Manager (re- designated as Dy. Manager) with the petitioner. After seven years of service, he was appointed as Dy. Manager (re-designated as Manager) and after four years of service as Manager, he was promoted to the post of Joint Manger (re-designated as Sr. Manager) in Finance and Accounts Division.

(3.) ON account of a publicity scam in the organization, petitioner was issued a memo dated 8th May, 1998 and he was asked to explain the alleged negligence pointed out in the confidential note, which was supported by the DGM Sh. K.S. Dabas. A detailed reply was given by the respondent on 20th May, 1998. The promotion of the respondent was deferred by the DPC which met on 12th May, 1998 on account of memo dated 8th May, 1998. According to the respondent, even Sealed Cover procedure in accordance with ITPO Service Rules and Government Orders was not followed in his case and he was victimized though he had not committed any wrong.