KISHOR J PANDYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order of punishment dated 26.09.2000 whereby the petitioner was ordered to be reduced in rank on the ground of misconduct.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as Sales Tax Inspector(Class II) on 25.07.1973. In the year the petitioner was promoted as Sales Tax Officer (Class I) and was posted at Jamnagar with effect from 12.04.1985. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax on 17.05.1989 and thereafter as Assistant Commissioner (Enforcement) on 04.06.1992. 2.1 It is the case of the petitioner that vide order dated 01.02.1996 the petitioner was suspended on the allegations that two industries viz. (1) M/s. Shreenathji Industries, Shahpur and (2) M/s. Umiya Industries, Vanthali were indulging in activities of mere billing as reported vide letter dated 08.02.1993 as well as letter dated 25.02.1993. It was alleged that the billing activities were going on for a long time and the petitioner was guilty of negligence in preventing it. On account of the said negligence there was a loss of Rs. 5,87,30,822/-. The petitioner was issued with a charge-sheet which was replied to by the petitioner. 2.2 Vide order dated 18.11.1998 the petitioner was reinstated as Assistant Sales-Tax Commissioner and was posted as Asst. Sales Tax Commissioner (Appeals) at Mehsana. Thereafter on 25.05.1999, the petitioner was informed that the Government had received the inquiry report by the Inquiry Officer and it was concluded therein that the charges alleged against the petitioner were proved. The petitioner was issued another show cause notice and was called upon to file his reply against the same. the petitioner submitted his reply on 01.06.1999. Thereafter vide order dated 26.09.200, the petitioner was imposed with a penalty of reduction in rank for a period of three years without affecting the seniority. Being aggrieved by the said penalty, the present petition is preferred.

(3.) HAVING heard learned advocates for both the sides and having gone through the materials on record, it is borne out that admittedly there has been a loss of sales tax to the tune of around Rs. 5,87,30,822/-. It appears that the petitioner committed default in taking action in time and thereby has shown negligence in duties. The petitioner had ordered ab- initio cancellation of registration certificates of 37 traders but in the present case by not cancelling the registration certificates and by merely informing the Assistant Sales-Tax Commissioner (Administration) to cancel the registration number clearly raises doubt about the integrity as well as honesty of the petitioner. The loss of such a huge amount to the State Exchequer cannot be lost sight of. The petitioner has failed to show any lacuna in the inquiry proceedings.