INDRAMANI BORDOLOI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. Nath, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. R. Borpujari, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents.

(2.) The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the charge sheet bearing No. FEB.17/2005/9 dtd. 31/3/2006, the enquiry report dtd. 6/7/2010 issued vide letter No.FEB/17/2005/Pt/46 dtd. 22/1/2013 and the penalty order No. FEB.17/2005/Pt./56 dtd. 4/4/2013 as well the Notification No.FEB.17/2005/Pt./62 dtd. 22/7/2014 and for a further direction upon the respondents to release the death-cum-retirement-gratuity of the petitioner, full pensionery benefits, monthly pension including arrear monthly pension.

(3.) The brief facts of the instant case is that the petitioner while working as the Assistant Director of Audit, Assam, a disciplinary proceedings was initiated against him vide an Office Memorandum bearing No. FEB.17/2005/9, dtd. 31/3/2006 under Rule 9 of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964(for short 'the Rules of 1964') read with Article 311 of the Constitution. The said show cause notice issued on 31/3/2006 has been enclosed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The charges levelled against the petitioner as could be found out from the said show cause notice are that the petitioner had shown approval of the Government dtd. 31/12/2002 for appointment of 5 candidates from the select list of the selection board. It was alleged that the petitioner had misled and suggested for appointment directly, though the said approval of the Government was for promotion from the rank of UD Assistant to the rank of Assistant Audit Officer. The second charge was that in the said endorsement, the petitioner had mentioned of a proposal note to the Government for approval of 5 posts which had no base. The third charge was that the petitioner had mentioned the grounds as