UNION OF INDIA Vs. B A DHAYALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have challenged the judgment dated 13th July, 2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, quashing the charge-sheets dated 12th November, 1999 and 11th October, 2004, as well as the subsequent proceedings initiated against the respondent and directing the petitioners to open the sealed cover adopted in the case of the respondent, and in case he is found to be fit, then as per recommendations of the DPC, to promoted him with all consequential benefits.

(2.) BRIEF facts as contended by the petitioners are that the respondent is a 1980 batch officer of the Indian Defense Estate Service and is working in the Directorate of Defense Estate. He had joined the service on 28th January, 1981 and in June 1983, he was promoted to the post of Senior Time Scale. Thereafter, he was also promoted to the post of JAG Selection Grade in 1998, which is when he was working as Defense Estates Officer (DEO), Secunderabad, after completing his tenure of DEO, Chandigarh. The next promotion was to the post of Senior Administrative Grade (SAG), for which the respondents name was also processed in the DPC held in December, 2005. However, his selection was kept in a sealed cover since disciplinary proceedings were pending against him.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, the inquiry proceedings with regard to both the charge sheets were completed on 29th September, 2008 and 26th December, 2008 respectively. In the inquiry report pertaining to the first charge sheet, the Enquiry Officer concluded that the charge had been proved to the extent that the procedure as laid down by the Government of India, had been violated, however, it could not be established that the Gram Panchayats to whom the payments were made, were not entitled to receive the same. In the inquiry report taking cognizance of the second charge sheet, the Enquiry Officer had concluded that all the charges were not proved against the respondent except for Article IV which was "strictly technically speaking proved".