SHRI MAHESH KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has challenged judgment and order dated 19 July 2013 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Mumbai Bench, whereby Original Application No. 326 of 2010 was dismissed and thereby minor penalty imposed by the Respondent's Appellate Authority is maintained.

(2.) The Petitioner averred that, "the Petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Inspector of Works Grade-I, on 30 March 1998 and was promoted as Assistant Engineer, Group-B post on 20 November 1999 and was again promoted to the post of Executive Engineer on ad-hoc basis and the same was regularized by the UPSC. While working as Executive Engineer, on 4 July 2005, the Petitioner was charge-sheeted alleging that; the Petitioner failed to detect excess payment to contractor in that payment for sum quantity of 355500 M3 was made as against actually executed quantity of 31169.43 M3 causing loss of Rs. 4.79 lacs; variation in thickness of sand layer against schedule item NS-4 (part B). Charge sheet was prepared by the Vigilance Department on 6 August 2004. The Petitioner denied the said charges. On 24 January 2007, the Inquiry Officer submitted his report by holding the Petitioner guilty in both the charges. The said report of Inquiry Officer was given to the Petitioner after 5 months. The Petitioner submitted his representation against the said report on 29 May 2007." As stated, the Petitioner came to know that the Inquiry Officer's report in case of Shri Kesarwani, Section Engineer, who was also issued similar charge-sheet and whose Inquiry Officer was also the same as of the Petitioner, whereby the Inquiry Officer held the Deputy Chief Engineer responsible for the second charge, whereas in his case, the Petitioner was held responsible for the same second charge. The Petitioner, on 1 June 2007 made representation to the General Manager about the arbitrary and bias findings of Inquiry Officer. The Petitioner made various representations to complete the Inquiry and pass final order. On 7 November 2008, as the final order was not passed, the Petitioner filed Application No. 544 of 2008 for early disposal of Inquiry. Accordingly, the Tribunal directed to complete the inquiry within four weeks. On 21 November 2008, DA i.e. ME (Railway Board) passed impugned order and held the Petitioner guilty in both the charges and imposed penalty of "reduction to a lower stage in the time scale pay by two stages for one year, without cumulative effect (i.e. which will not affect the postponing his future increments) and not adversely affecting his pension.". On 17 December 2008, the Petitioner preferred appeal to the President of India. As the Appeal was not decided for long period, he filed Original Application No. 225 of 2009 before the Tribunal on 22 April 2009. The Tribunal has disposed of the said Application by directing to decide within eight weeks. On 11 November 2009, the Appeal filed by the Petitioner was rejected. The Petitioner filed Original Application No. 326 of 2010 before Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai on 7 April 2010. The CAT, accordingly, on 19 July 2013 dismissed the Original Application and hence the present Writ Petition.

(3.) Heard the Petitioner in person and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents finally. Both the parties have read and referred the pleadings, written submissions and the judgments in support of their respective contentions.