YOGESH Vs. INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN July, 2014, petitioner was Personal Assistant, Grade -II with respondent -Indira Gandhi National Open University (hereinafter referred to as 'IGNOU'), against whom disciplinary proceedings were initiated regarding receiving of illegal gratification of Rs. 12,000/ - as part payment to get the complainant admitted in Ph.D course in Public Administration.

(2.) ALTHOUGH Inquiry Officer had given a clean chit to petitioner but the Disciplinary Authority had disagreed with the Inquiry Officer and had entrusted the Inquiry Report to an independent authority to examine the Inquiry Report and on the basis of the Report received from the independent authority, petitioner has been removed from service with a rider that the removal will not be a disqualification for future employment under the Government. The Appellate Authority vide impugned order of 1st April, 2015 has affirmed the penalty of removal from service inflicted upon petitioner.

(3.) AT the hearing, it was vehemently submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the evidence recorded during the inquiry does not incriminate petitioner and so, petitioner cannot be held guilty merely on the basis of his admission of guilt, particularly when the confession/ guilt stands retracted by him when petitioner was called upon to give statement in his defence in the inquiry. It was submitted on behalf of petitioner that the purported confession made before the issuance of charge -sheet is not corroborated by any material on record and since it was made under duress, therefore, it is of no avail. Reliance was placed upon a Division Bench decision of the High Court of Calcutta in Allahabad Bank Vs. P.K. Mukherjee & Ors. : 1993 I L.L.J. 390 to submit that an admission has to be strictly construed. The pertinent observations relied upon by counsel for petitioner in Allahabad Bank (supra) are as under: -