K N SHUKLA Vs. BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who has been removed from service under rule 23 of Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), has filed this writ petition challenging the order of removal from service and for directions that after quashing the impugned order the petitioner be declared to have continued in service with all benefits.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that the petitioner, who is a qualified science graduate with Bachelor of Engineering Degree from Roorkee and who is stated to have brilliant academic record and had also received training in U. S. S. R. in design and production and held certain responsible positions in different public undertakings had joined the respondent undertaking as Senior Manager with effect from February 15, 1977, and was promoted as Deputy General Manager with effect from April 2, 1982, in the pay scale of Rs. 2250-2750, was dealt with disciplinary proceedings on the basis of the two charges against him, firstly, that he while functioning as Deputy General Manager, Panipat, during the period December 1982 to January 1983 had preferred false LTC claim in respect of the journey from Howrah to Varanasi purported to have been performed by him and his family members from December 31, 1982 to January 1, 1983, in First Class against ticket Nos. 9014-9017 and 3229 and 3226 which shows that he had failed to maintain absolute integrity and acted in a manner unbecoming of a public servant thereby violating Rule 4 of the Rules and secondly, that while he applied for grant of one advance increment and cash incentive in terms of relevant instructions on the basis of certificate of Dr. P. N. Shukla, Senior Surgeon, Combined Hospital, Chandauli countersigned by its Superintendent certifying that the petitioner was vasectomised on January 1, 1983, in that hospital and another certificate without any date issued by Dr. B. N. Shukla certifying that the sperm count of the petitioner found that vasectomy operation had been completely successful whereas, in fact, the petitioner did not get any vasectomy operation and sperm count done at the said hospital at any time and had sought advance increment and cash incentive on false grounds which acts of the petitioner showed that he had not maintained absolute integrity and acted in a manner unbecoming of a public servant thereby violating Rule 4 of the Rules.

(3.) THE backdrop of the holding of disciplinary inquiry was on the basis of suspicion entertained by Shri Anil Khanna, Senior Personnel Manager, regarding the genuineness of the petitioner's claim of grant of advance increment on the basis of vasectomy operation undergone by him as he opined that good facilities for such like operation are available at Panipat and Delhi and it was really somewhat abnormal that the petitioner who was enjoying his LTC trip should have got himself operated by breaking journey at Varanasi and the too from a far flung hospital from Varanasi and he should travel after the operation on the same day and reach Delhi on the next day and resume his duty in time. Shri R. N. Sharma, Senior Security and Vigilance Officer, made certain spot inquiries at the hospital and submitted his report dated July 29, 1983, recommending for holding an inquiry. On July 4, 1984, a memorandum containing charges mentioned above was served on the petitioner and after recording evidence the Inquiry Officer Shri A. R. Banerjee held the petitioner guilty of both the charges and on the basis of the inquiry report the penalty of removal from service was imposed on the petitioner by the respondent. It is undisputed fact that Shri B. S. Samant, Director (power), had ordered for holding of disciplinary inquiry and he had also passed the impugned order of removal of the petitioner from service.