RATNESH KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-Ratnesh Kumar impugns the order dated 13th July, 2016 passed by the Principal bench of Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short), dismissing OA No. 3511/2014.

(2.) The selection and appointment of Ratnesh Kumar as Assistant (Coordination) for the upcoming steel processing unit in Bokaro Steel Plant, along with other selections, came under cloud and scanner on account of deception and for reasons noticed below.

(3.) The memorandum of charge dated 4th January, 2012, was issued to the petitioner, to which he submitted his reply on 11th January, 2012. An enquiry committee constituted vide office order dated 2nd February, 2012 held proceedings, recorded evidence, and submitted an inculpatory report holding the charge of misconduct of indulging in corrupt practice, was correct and proven. Charge No. 1 'fraud in connection with company's business? and charge no. 3 'conduct bringing disrepute to the company', it was held, were not proved. The Disciplinary Authority disagreed and issued a disagreement note dated 7th February, 2014 pertaining to charge nos. 1 and 3, asserting that there was enough circumstantial evidence to establish that the petitioner was one of the beneficiaries of the deviant recruitment process, contrary to the prescribed recruitment procedure. The petitioner submitted his reply on 14th February, 2014. The Disciplinary Authority, referring to both oral and documentary evidence, passed the order dated 17th February, 2014 imposing the penalty of dismissal from service.