COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Vs. KUNJURAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The remand ordered by the Central Administrative Tribunal as per Ext. P4 in respect of the disciplinary proceedings finalized against the respondents imposing a major penalty and affirmed by the appellate authority, for causing the matter to be reconsidered; holding that the punishment imposed is shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of the proven misconduct, is the subject matter of challenge in these Original Petitions.

(2.) O.P.(Cat) No. 3229 of 2011 arises from the verdict passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in O.A. No. 895 of 2009, whereas the cause of action in the other case arises from O.A. No. 899 of 2009. The sequence of events, nature of insinuation levelled against and the outcome are almost similar, but for the fact that in O.P.(CAT) No. 3229 of 2001, only nine charges were involved, whereas in the other case, altogether 12 charges were levelled against the respondent/delinquent employee. In the said circumstances, O.P.(CAT) No. 3229 of 2011 is treated as the lead case and the reference is made to the parties and proceedings, as referred to in the said Original Petition, except to the extent where separate reference is made, depending upon the context.

(3.) Heard Sri. Vineeth Komalachandran, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Sri. Govinda Swami, who entered appearance on behalf of the party respondents.