AMRIK SINGH Vs. DTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON February 11, 2013 we had passed the following order:-

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent states that she has obtained instructions. The petitioner is a member of the Pension Scheme. As regards the offer by the petitioner that if the penalty of removal from service could be converted to one of compulsory retirement with pension and gratuity to be paid as envisaged under Rule 40 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, learned counsel for the respondent states that she has no instruction whether the department is willing to accept the offer.

(3.) WHY do disciplinary service rules vest the authorities with a range of penalties to be levied; censure > withholding increments without future effect >withholding increments with cumulative effect > reduction to a lower stage in pay with or without cumulative effect > reduction to a lower post either permanently or temporarily > compulsory retirement > removal from service > dismissal from service. The reason is obvious. The nature and gravity of the wrong, the moral turpitude of the wrong, loss or damage caused to the organization etc., are the factors which have a bearing on the penalty to be levied. Similarly, past service rendered has also to be taken note of. In other words, a penalty must weigh all the pros and the cons.