P J KADIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the alleged illegal and arbitrary action of the respondent authorities of imposing punishment of dismissal from service of the petitioner vide order dated 27.02.2006.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner had joined the service of the respondent authorities on 05.10.1976 as a Junior Clerk and in due course the petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Clerk on 08.11.1989. The petitioner was working as a Cashier with the respondent authority since 03.10.1997. On 23.10.2000, while working as Cashier, the petitioner received a bonus bill for the year 19992000 for an amount of Rs. 4,13,015/. After entering the said bill in the bill register, and after due process, the petitioner received an amount of Rs.4,13,015/ for distributing the same to the concerned employees as Bonus. Due to bonafide arithmetical mistake, an amount of Rs.2,79,849/ was wrongly debited by the petitioner. The said lapse came to the notice of the petitioner on 15.03.2001. The petitioner brought this to the notice of the Head Clerk and accordingly the said amount, which was lying in the cash box and the drawer of the iron cupboard, was taken into possession by the respondent authorities. Therefore, on 27.09.2001, a chargesheet was issued to the petitioner. Since the charges levelled against the petitioner were proved by the inquiry officer, he was issued show cause notice. The petitioner responded to the show cause notice and at the end, dismissal order of the petitioner came to be passed on 27.02.2006. 2. The petitioner therefore, filed appeal before the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal which came to be rejected vide order dated 09.10.2006. Hence, this petition.

(3.) LEARNED advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that along with the petitioner three other employees were also chargesheeted for alleged misconduct, wherein the charges levelled against Head Clerk Shri K.M. Vankar and Junior Clerk Shir N.K. Parmar are also to be proved by the Inquiry officer. However, meager punishment of Censor was imposed upon the other two employees, whereas the petitioner is ordered to be dismissed from service.