R.A.K.SRIVASTAVA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Arvind Vashishth, advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. L.P. Naithani, senior advocate assisted by Mr. J. P. Joshi, advocate appearing for respondents No. 2 and 3.

(2.) THIS is a writ petition by the deputationist, who was earlier working with the Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology, Dehradun. Thus, he was working under the Institute controlled by the Central Government. During his service, he was sent on deputation and was appointed as a Chairman of Commission for Scientific and Technical Terminology (hereinafter referred to as Commission), which was run under the control of Ministry of Human Resources and Development and more particularly, the department of Secondary and Higher Education. This deputation period, admittedly, is between 1-12-1998 to 30-11-2000. While he was engaged as such in his capacity as a Chairman of the aforementioned Commission, he is said to have committed misconduct on 18-11-1999 inasmuch as, he claimed his travelling allowance twice in respect of a trip undertaken by him.

(3.) THE petitioner, in his defence statement, objected to the jurisdiction of the parent department and the disciplinary authority, thereunder, to conduct a disciplinary inquiry as it was his contention that the misconduct. If any, was committed by him while he was a deputationist and as such, it was only the borrowing department (the department where he was working on deputation), which had the jurisdiction to conduct any such inquiry. For this purposes, the petitioner relied on Rule 20 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter refers to as Rules). It seems that this objection also did not weigh with the department and the department went on to hold the inquiry on merits, in which the petitioner took full part. It seems that as the result of the inquiry, the petitioner has been found guilty and has been given the punishment of compulsory retirement from the service.