UNION OF INDIA Vs. MAHENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ appeal by the Union of India represented by its Secretary Department of Service and Technology, New Delhi is directed against the judgment of our learned brother Jeevan Reddy, J.

(2.) The respondent Sri Mahendra Kumar was selected and appointed as Officer Surveyor in the Department of Survey of India in they year 1959. From the year 1978 he has been functioning as General Secretary of the Survey of India Class-II Officers Association. The Surveyor-General of India, Dehradun, U.P. State by his order, dated 20/10/1978 suspended him from service pending an enquiry into certain charges. Subsequently the suspension was revoked. Meanwhile disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as C.C.S. (C.C. & A.) Rules, were initiated and a memo containing three charges was served on him on 6/11/1978 and they are as follows :- "(1) That, the said Shri Mahendra Kumar while functioning as Officer Surveyor in the Centre for Survey Training and Map Production, Survey of India, Hyderabad, during the period February, 1978 wrote an anonymous letter addressed to Lt. Col. (now Colonel) P. Misra, Director, Survey Training Institute (CST & MP), Survey of India, Hyderabad, containing improper remarks, in a manner unbecoming of a Government servant, and thereby violating Rule 3(1)(iii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. (2) That, the said Shri Mahendra Kumar while functioning as Officer Surveyor in the Centre for Survey Training and Map Production, Survey of India, Hyderabad during February, 1978 and March, 1978 respectively wrote an anonymous letter and a pseudonymous letter both addressed to the Union Finance Minister, containing remarks amounting to complaints against officers of Survey of India and criticising the manner of functioning of Government of India, in a manner unbecoming of a Government servant and thereby violating Rule 3(1)(iii) and Rule 9 of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. (3) That, the said Shri Mahendra Kumar while functioning as Officer Surveyor in the Centre for Survey Training and Map Production, Survey of India, Hyderabad during the period between June 1978 and August, 1978 most improperly circulated anonymous cyclostyled "bulletins" titled "Survey of India Civilian Officers Information Bulletin ........" from time to time, which included serious and derogatory allegations against superior officers of Survey of India, intended to create disaffection and division amongst the officers in the department and cause conditions prejudicial to the smooth running of administration and criticising the action of the Central Government in regard to its policies, and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Government servant, thereby violating Rule 3(1)(iii) and Rule 9 of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964".

(3.) An Enquiry Officer was appointed. Both sides adduced evidence. Before the Enquiry Officer the respondent admitted having written these letters. On the basis of the material on record, the Enquiry Officer held that the first letter which is the subject matter of charge No. 1 did not contain any improper remarks. With regard to charge No. 2, he held that in view of the admission made by the petitioner having written the letters, until and unless an enquiry is held into the truth or otherwise of the allegations made therein, it is not possible to hold that they contained false, unfounded or imaginary complaints. So far as the third charge is concerned, it was held that it is not proved. The report was duly submitted to the disciplinary authority, viz., the Surveyor-General of India, who disagreed with the report of the Enquiry Officer and also held that all the three charges were proved against the respondent and awarded punishment of dismissal from services as not being a fit person to be retained in Government service. Against the said order the petitioner i.e., the respondent herein preferred an appeal to the Union of India, which is the appellate authority. Pending the appeal, the Union Public Service Commission was consulted in the matter as provided under the Rules and after receipt of opinion of the Union Public Service Commission the appellate authority modified the sentence of dismissal to one of reduction to the next lower post of Surveyor (Section Grade) on a pay of Rs. 900.00 per month in the scale of Rs. 550-900.00, for a period of five years, with the stipulation that the petitioner will be restored to his original post on the expiry of the period of reduction, and that on restoration, such reduction will not affect his seniority and pay. It may be noted here that in its advice the Union Public Service Commission observed that charge No. 3 was not proved and that only charge Nos. 1 and 2 are partly proved. Challenging the said order of the Union of India, the respondent filed the writ petition.