SANKARANARAYANAN P I Vs. SPICES BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Original Petition, O. P. 152 of 1999, was filed by the petitioner Sri P. I. Sankaranarayanan, against the Spices Board to quash Ext. P2 order dated July 21, 1998 of the Chairman of the Spices Board and Ext. P4 order dated December 2, 1998 passed by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce. Since both the Original Petition and the writ appeal raise common questions and are filed by the same petitioner/appellant against the very same respondents, both matters were taken together for final disposal by consent of both parties.

(2.) DISCIPLINARY proceedings under Regulation 10 of the Spices Board Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Regulations was instituted against the petitioner as per Memo dated November 6, 1996. The charges levelled against him in brief is that on his reporting for duty on February 20, 1991 at the Regional Office of the Board at Saklespur, Karnataka, he proceeded on leave with effect from February 21, 1991 and thereafter he neither reported back for duty nor submitted any application for leave after the expiry of the leave sanctioned to him upto August 31, 1995. Thus, it was alleged that he overstayed his leave from August 31, -1995 onwards and absented from duty unauthorisedly from September 1, 1995 onwards. It is also the case of the Board that during the said period when he was transferred and posted at the Zonal Office at Calicut, he did not report for duty there also; and by the above act of the petitioner, on wilful absence, overstaying of sanctioned leave and remaining unauthorisedly absent from duty with effect from September 1, 1995 onwards, he exhibited lack of devotion to duty and has conducted himself in a manner unbecoming of an employee of the Board, violating Rule 3 (1) (ii) and (iii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

(3.) THE petitioner denied the charges levelled against him. A retired District Judge was appointed as the Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges. The Enquiry Officer, after the enquiry, gave a finding that the petitioner has overstayed his leave from August 31, 1995 onwards and that he can only be treated as unauthorisedly absent from duty from September 1, 1995 onwards and that he, because of his refusal to join duty at the transferred station and post, his overstaying of the sanctioned leave and his unauthorised absence, has not maintained devotion to duty and has acted in a manner which is unbecoming of a Government Servant. The Inquiry Officer has also stated that the charges framed against the petitioner have been proved. A copy of the report of enquiry was sent to the petitioner on November 7, 1997. By memo dated November 24, 1997 he was given an opportunity of making such submission as to why the finding of the Inquiry Officer cannot be accepted and further action taken on the basis of the findings. The petitioner did not submit any representation. The Chairman of the Board, therefore, provisionally came to the conclusion that the petitioner was not a fit person to be retained in the services of the Board and penalty of dismissal from service was proposed to be imposed on him. An opportunity was given to him to make any representation on the penalty proposed. The petitioner did not submit any representation within the time prescribed. Therefore, the Chairman of the Board, after considering the records of the enquiry, came to the conclusion that the petitioner overstayed the sanctioned leave, had been unauthorisedly absent from duty from September 1, 1995 onwards and had refused to report for duty and by the above acts the petitioner had exhibited lack of devotion to duty and had conducted himself in a manner unbecoming of an employee of the Spices Board. Accordingly, the penalty of dismissal from service was imposed on the petitioner under Ext. P2.