BIJAY KUMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner in this writ application calls in question the Order Dated 13.08.2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No.126 of 2006 rejecting the application filed by him. In the Original Application the Petitioner had challenged the orders of the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority dismissing him from service. In this writ application, he challenges the findings recorded by the Enquiring Officer, the decision of the Disciplinary Authority, the order of the Appellate Authority and the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack.

(2.) THE applicant was working as GDSBPM in Kandajuri Branch Post Office in account with Loisingha Sub Post Office. On the allegation that he has misconducted himself, disciplinary proceedings under Rule 10 of G.D.S. (Conduct and Employment) Rules, 2001 was initiated against him. After completion of the proceedings, the Disciplinary Authority imposed punishment of removal from service on 27.12.2004. He challenged the same in appeal before the Appellate Authority. His appeal was also rejected on 05.08.2005. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed Original Application before the Tribunal, which as per the Order Dated 13.08.2009 dismissed his application. It is apparent from the records that the applicant while working as GDSBPM of Kandajuri Branch Post Office in account with Loisingha Sub Post Office during the period from 01.09.1976 to 04.07.2002 received Kundukela SDMO No. 4086 dated 01.03.2002 for Rs.2000 payable to Sri Manchita Rana of village Pandarani, P.O. Kandajuri Via. Loisingha on 08.03.2002 at Kandajuri Branch Post Office for effecting payment. The applicant paid the aforesaid money order to a person other than the real payee on 21.03.2002 falsifying LTI in the Money Order paid voucher. Besides that the Petitioner while working as such accepted Rs.20 and Rs.200 from one Ram Narayan Brahma on 03.04.2002 for making deposit in R.D. Account No.1100773 and 1100699 of Kandujuri Branch in the name of Sri Haladhara Brahma and Sri Ram Narayan Brahma respectively. It is alleged that the Petitioner did not credit the accepted money into the post office account as required under rules and regulations. It is further alleged that the Petitioner accepted Rs.4,500 on 03.11.2001 from the depositor Sri Jasobanta Dash for making deposit in Kandajuri SB. Account No.57900 standing open at Kandajuri B.O. but did not credit the said amount into the post office account as required under Rules. It was alleged that the Petitioner has committed grave offence intentionally and deliberately in gross violation of the rules and regulations of the Post Office. Accordingly, charges under three heads were framed against the Petitioner.

(3.) IN assailing the orders passed by the Tribunal, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Enquiring Officer's report holding Articles II and III as proved is based on no evidence and the depositor has categorically stated that he has not tendered money to the applicant in respect of Charge No.II and in respect of Charge No.III, the depositor has also stated that he has taken back the money immediately. Alternatively it is argued that the punishment imposed on the Petitioner by the Disciplinary Authority is shockingly disproportionate to the charges leveled against him &, therefore, the same should be set aside and the matter should be again decided by the Disciplinary Authority. The Learned Asst. Solicitor General, on the other hand, submitted that the Courts in exercise of the writ jurisdiction should not sit in appeal over the findings recorded by the Enquiring Officer/Disciplinary Authority and it is the duty of the Appellate Authority to do the same Secondly, it is contended that the employees of a Bank enjoy the trust of the depositors and in a case where such trust is breached then the highest punishment should be imposed. Therefore, he contended that the appeal be dismissed.