M P THAKRAR Vs. SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short dispute in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is as to whether the penalty levied on the petitioner of reduction to four stages lower in the timescale as confirmed by the appellate authority is required to be quashed and set aside as prayed for.

(2.) The facts in brief : The petitioner, who is serving as Higher Grade Assistant with Life Insurance Corporation of India in Veraval Branch Office availed off Leave Travel Concession (LTC) advance on six different occasions. The petitioner did not undertake the proposed journey nor did he proceed on leave. On 14th March, 1996 a charge-sheet came to be issued in the aforesaid backdrop of facts that the petitioner had misused facility of LTC advance and by utilizing the monies so obtained, for his personal purposes, temporarily misappropriated the same. Inquiry officer appointed by the respondent-Corporation found the charges proved as per Report dated 21st August, 1997. The disciplinary authority concurred with the findings in the inquiry report and after giving opportunity to the petitioner imposed penalty of reduction to four stages lower in the timescale vide order dated 30th September, 1997. Exercising his right of appeal, the petitioner preferred appeal but did not succeed. The appellate authority vide order dated 15th May, 1998 confirmed the penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority.

(3.) The learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the order made by the disciplinary authority was required to be quashed and set aside for the simple reason that the explanation tendered by the petitioner had not been considered by the disciplinary authority. That except for referring to the reply given by the petitioner the grounds raised by the petitioner have not been dealt with by the disciplinary authority. The second contention was that instruction No.19 of Life Insurance Corporation of India (Leave Travel Concession) Instructions, 1994 (Instructions), which pertains to advances specifically provides that in case an employee does not refund the LTC advance within seven days after the advance drawn by the employee becomes due for refund as per clause (vi), the amount of advance so due for refund shall be recovered from the next pay bill of the employee. Thus, according to him, it could not be stated that the petitioner had committed any breach of any rules and regulations amounting to any misconduct calling for initiation of disciplinary proceedings. A further contention was raised that Regulation 39 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960, which deals with penalties did not permit, in any event levy of penalty by way of reduction to more than one lower stage in timescale and the penalty imposed of reduction to four lower stages in timescale was thus bad in law. In support of the submissions made the learned advocate placed reliance on the following decisions in the case of :