RUSTOM ALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An order dated 5th June, 1996 passed by the disciplinary authority of the Assam State Co-operative Marketing and Consumer's Federation Limited (STATFED) imposing the penalty of reduction of rank on the writ petitioner along with recovery of the amount misappropriated is the subject matter of challenge in the present proceeding. As the aforesaid order passed by the disciplinary authority has been affirmed in appeal by the appellate authority of STATFED by order dated 22nd September, 1997, the said order is another connected aspect of the challenge made herein.

(2.) By a charge memo dated 21st 1993, as many as four different charges were brought against the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner was charged with misappropriation of stock amounting to Rs.30,608.84 for the year ending 31.3.93. A further charge of dereliction of duty, leaving of HQrs, without prior permission and without handling over charge, with effect from 7.4.93 and further charges of misappropriation of two different amounts i.e. Rs.4,480.62 and Rs.2,584.85 were also brought against the writ petitioner. The reply of the writ petitioner to the charge mem not having satisfied the disciplinary authority, it was decided to hold an enquiry. Accordingly, an Enquiry Officer was appointed and in the proceedings in enquiry, one witness was examined in support of the charges. The charges were also sought to be proved by bringing on record a number of documents. The writ petitioner, delinquent officer, did not examine any witness; neither any documents were adduced by him. At the conclusion of the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer in his report dated 17th February, 1994 found the writ petitioner guilty of all charges. The disciplinary authority concurred with the said findings of the Enquiry officer and imposed the punishment'in question by order dated 5th June, 1996. The appeal against the said order filed by the petitioner having been dismissed on 22nd September, 1997, the instant recourse to the writ remedy has been made by the writ petitioner.

(3.) I have heard Mr. B.Chakraborty, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Mr. M.K.Choudhury, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.