R GOPAL RAO Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MADRAS II MADRAS 600034 NOW DESIGNATED THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TAMIL NADU V COIMBATORE 641018

JUDGEMENT

(1.) were initiated against the writ petitioner by the Income-tax Department, and the writ petitioner, in turn, filed a number of writ petitions and writ appeals in this Court, with the result, there has been a tortuous and prolonged litigation between the parties lasting over a period of nearly 21 years.

(2.) The writ petitioner was appointed as Officiating Lower Division Clerk in the Income-tax Department, by an order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Central Range, Madras on 15th January, 1947. He joined duty on 8th February, 1947. He was appointed as Officiating Steno-Typist on 11th January, 1950, by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Central Range and he was then confirmed as Lower Division Clerk with effect from 1st October, 1951, by an order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, dated 28th December, 1951. Later he was confirmed as Steno-typist with effect from 1st October, 1951, by an order of the Commissioner, Income-tax, dated 27th December, 1956. Subsequently the petitioner was promoted as Officiating Upper Division Clerk and was posted to the Income-tax Office, Salem, where he joined duty on 25th November, 1957. In May, 1959 the petitioner was transferred from Salem to Ooty. He did not join duty at Ooty and went on applying for leave on one ground or other. All his representations against his transfer were rejected. The petitioner, without joining duty at Ooty went on applying for lease for long period. This leave was refused. Even then the petitioner failed to report for duty at Ooty. Then the first disciplinary proceedings were initiated by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Coimbatore, on a charge that he wilfully absented himself from duty. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 5th April, 1960, proposing to revert him as Steno-typist for a period of one year and to treat the period of his absence without leave as extraordinary leave. The petitioner submited his representation on 8th April, 1960, to the show cause notice issued to him. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner then passed an order reverting the petitioner to the substantive post of Steno-typist and posted him to the Income-tax Office. Ooty. Then the second disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Coimbatore, for various irregularities in his work and charges were framed at various stages and ultimately the petitioner was compulsorily retired from service by the order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, dated 31st March, 1963. As the petitioners appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax failed, he filed a Writ Petition No. 301 of 1963 chalenging the order of compulsory retirement. The petition was allowed on the ground that the petitioner was confirmed in the category of Steno-typist by the Commissioner of Income-tax and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was not, therefore, competent authority for imposing a major penalty like compulsory retirement. The Income-tax Department filed Writ Appeal No. 44 of 1965 against the order passed in the writ petition. During the pendency of the writ appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax initiated the third disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner on the same charges on which the punishment of compulsory retirement was originally imposed on the petitioner. On 22nd December, 1964, the Commissioner of Income-tax issued a show cause notice invoking rule 12 (4) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (hereinafter to be referred to as CCS (CCA) Rules, 1957), and passed the interim suspension order with retrospective effect from 31st March, 1962. On 6th May, 1965, the Commission framed the following further three charges against the petitioner: Charge No. 1.- That the said Shri R. Gopal Rao while functioning as Steno-Typist, Income-tax Office, Ootacamund during the period of April and May, 1961, addresed the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, personally in his letter, dated 29th April, 1961, though the contents of the letter were purely official and also couched the letter in offensive and objectionable language and thereby committed acts of indiscipline and insubordination. Charge No. 2.- That during the above period and while functioning in the aforesaid office, the said Shri R. Gopal Rao refused to go to the Income-tax Officers room when called to do so. Charge No. 3.- That during the above period and while functioning in the aforesaid office, the said Shri Gopal Rao refused to take delivery of official communications intended for him, and thereby committed acts of indiscipline and insubordination. The said charges were communicated to the petitioner asking him to submit his representations before 15th June, 1965. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Coimbatore, was appointed as Inquiry Officer. As the petitioner did not appear before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, he proceeded with the enquiry ex parte and submitted his report to the Commissioner of Income-tax the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority, after consideration of the report of the inquiry officer, came to be provisional conclusion that the petitioner should be compul-sorily retired from service. The said provisional decision was communicated to the petitioner by a show cause notice, dated 27th February, 1970, which was served on the petitioner on 2nd March, 1970. The petitioner filed two writ petitions, W.P. Nos. 710 of 1970 and 711 of 1970, one for quashing the above show cause notice dated 27th February, 1970, and the other to restore him to the post of Upper Division Clerk, with effect from 13th October, 1959. The two writ petitions were dismissed at the admission stage on 17th March, 1970. The petitioner filed two appeals against the order dismissing the writ petitions at the admission stage and requested the Court to stay the disciplinary proceedings. The petition for stay was dismissed on 14th December, 1970. The Commissioner of Income-tax thereafter issued another memo., dated 22nd December, 1970, requiring the petitioner to show cause against the proposed penalty of compulsory retirement. The petitioner did not file his reply to the show cause notice. The writ appeals filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed on 22nd April, 1971. On the same day, another memo, was issued to the petitioner by the Commissioner of Income-tax to file his representations within a week. The petitioner ultimately submitted his representations on 2nd July, 1971 and 3rd July, 1971. After considering the representations, the Commissioner passed the final orders on 26th October, 1972, reducing the petitioner from his substantive post of steno-typist to the rank of Class IV, with a direction to join duty as Class IV employee in the Income-tax Office at Ooty. The order further stated that the petitioner shall not be eligible for promotion to any higher post for a period of three years. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 2079 of 1972 against the show cause dated 22nd December, 1964, issued to him. Writ Petition No. 3749 of 1983 was filed challenging the final order passed by the Commissioner on 26th October, 1972, reducing him to the rank of Class IV employee with direction to join duty as Class IV employee at Ooty.

(3.) The main contentions of the petitioner in both the writ petitions are: