UNION OF INDIA Vs. DR. M.B. PAHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, has challenged the order dated 8th April, 2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A No. 2234/2008 titled as "Dr. M.B. Pahari v. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and Anr.' allowing the original application of the respondent and setting aside the order dated 9th September, 2008 imposing the punishment of 25% cut in the monthly pension of the respondent for five years pursuant to the setting aside of the disagreement note of the Disciplinary Authority. However, the Tribunal granted liberty to the petitioner to proceed against the respondent from the stage of receipt of the Enquiry Report; and in case the Disciplinary Authority tentatively differs from the finding of the Enquiry Report then to communicate the tentative disagreement to the respondent and after hearing the respondent, to pass appropriate orders imposing such punishment as may be deemed appropriate by the petitioner.

(2.) BRIEF facts to comprehend the disputes between the parties are that the respondent was posted as DDG at Doordarshan Kendra, New Delhi and retired from service with effect from 31st August, 2004 on attaining the age of superannuation. At the time of his retirement the respondent was under suspension. The respondent was suspended by order dated 31st August, 1999 with effect from 14th September, 1999. Before the respondent superannuated, by order dated 5th February, 2002, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the respondent under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The Articles of Charges against the respondent were that while functioning as Director/DTG, Doordarshan Kendra, Delhi during the year 1997 -1998, he did not follow the required norms for the recruitment of stringers as per the provision contained in O.M No. 4/4/83 -P III dated 4th April, 1983 and he did not utilize the panel of stringers prepared prior to 1994. The imputation was also made against the respondent that while availing the services of the stringers, he failed to requisition a proper form signed by the Director or Chief Producer (News) of the Doordarshan Kendra containing the details about the location and time of the event to be covered and failed to minimize the expenditure for hiring the stringers. It was also alleged that he was instrumental in allotting the work of royalty based programmes/free lanced programmes to the firms owned by wife, relatives, friends of Sh. S.K. Mathur, Chief Producer, DDK, Delhi though these firms were not empanelled as stringers in terms of the relevant guidelines, and thus the respondent failed to maintain absolute integrity and exhibited lack of devotion to duty and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Government servant.

(3.) THE Enquiry Officer gave his report on 30th July, 2004 which was forwarded to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, who was the Disciplinary Authority in the matter, on 5th August, 2004 and thereafter on 31st August, 2004 the respondent had superannuated.