D K DAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner assails the order dated 04.12.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) dismissing OA No.100/3667/2015, preferred by the petitioner to challenge the order of penalty passed against him by the respondent. The petitioner also assails the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him and the consequent penalty imposed on him.

(2.) The petitioner joined the service of the CPWD as a Junior Engineer. He was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer. At that stage, a charge-sheet was issued against him on 04.04.2003 wherein four Articles of Charge were framed against him. The principal allegation against the petitioner was that he had split the works assigned by him in such a way, that they came within the financial limits applicable to him, but in actuality, exceeded the said limits in a surreptitious manner. After considering his explanation, with which the disciplinary authority was not satisfied, the disciplinary authority appointed an Inquiry Officer (I.O.) and a Presenting Officer (P.O.). The I.O. held Charges I and IV as proved, and Charges II and III as not proved. The disciplinary authority, tentatively disagreed with the findings of the I.O. on Charges II and III, and issued a disagreement note to the petitioner. Upon considering the reply of the petitioner, those two charges were also held to be proved. Resultantly, vide order dated 10.04.2006, the punishment of reduction in the time scale of pay by three stages for a period of three years was imposed on the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner's departmental appeal against the penalty order dated 10.04.2006 was also rejected. Aggrieved thereby, he preferred OA No.238/2008. The Tribunal accepted the petitioner's plea that the respondent had failed to comply with Rule 14(18) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and, consequently, set aside the penalty order dated 10.04.2006. The matter was thereafter remitted to the disciplinary authority for fresh consideration. At this stage, it may be noted that the order passed by the Tribunal setting aside the penalty order dated 10.04.2006 attained finality, since the writ petition preferred by the respondent impugning the same, was dismissed by this Court on 28.09.2010.