UNION OF INDIA Vs. MAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred the petition to assail the order dated 25.03.2014 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (the Tribunal) in OA No. 3366/2012. The Tribunal vide its order dated 25.03.2014 allowed the O.A. preferred by the respondent and set aside the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent, as well as the order dated 16.08.2012 of the Disciplinary Authority imposing penalty upon the respondent.

(2.) Before the Tribunal, the Respondent had challenged the departmental inquiry proceedings undertaken against him, which culminated in the passing of the penalty order dated 16.08.2012, imposing the penalty of reduction to the next lower post in the scale of pay of Rs.9300-34800 grade pay of Rs. 4800 till his retirement. The challenge to the Disciplinary Proceedings was primarily premised on the submission that, even though 14 documents had been relied upon by the Respondent in support of the charges, not a single witness had appeared in the enquiry to prove them.

(3.) The Tribunal allowed the OA, since the Tribunal found that no evidence had been led against the respondent. The Tribunal also held that the inquiry officer had acted in complete violation of sub-rule (3) (14) (16) & (17) of Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules"). The Tribunal held that the department had relied upon 14 documents in the Articles of Charge. However, not a single departmental witness had been named to prove the said documents, and none was produced in the inquiry proceedings to prove the said documents. The Tribunal placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Roop Singh Negi Vs. Punjab National Bank and Others, (2009) 2 SCC 570, wherein it was held that mere production of documents is not enough, and their contents have to be proved by examining the concerned witnesses.