UNION OF INDIA Vs. AMIYA KANTI PATTNAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the Union of India represented through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, seeking to challenge the order dated 30.7.2004, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No.675 of 2002, whereby, the application of the applicant -opposite party, Amiyakanti Patnaik was allowed and the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the applicant -opposite party was quashed and as a consequence of which, the impugned order punishment as well as confirmation of the said order by the appellate authority as well, were quashed.

(2.) FROM the records of the proceeding, it appears that the applicant -opposite party, Sri Amiya Kanti Patnaik challenged the order of punishment passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Bhubaneswar -II before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (in short 'the Tribunal).

(3.) IN the light of the aforesaid contentions raised by the applicant opposite party, the Tribunal came to find that although it is alleged that the opposite party was a member of the "raiding team", no evidence could be produced in course of departmental proceeding, and instead it was proved that, the applicant -opposite party had not been directed to act as an "Seizing Officer". The tribunal also came to find that none of the relevant documents, namely, Panchanama, Search Warrant and Search Warrant Register, which are vital records to bring home the charges against the applicant -opposite party, was ever produced in course of departmental proceeding, even though the said documents had been listed as Exhibits on behalf of the Department in order to substantiate its charge.