(1.) HEARD Mr. PK Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. H. Rahman, learned Sr. CGSC appearing on behalf of the Union of India respondents.
(2.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the judgment and order dated 15. 03. 2000 passed by the learned Members, Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, (for short 'the Tribunal') in OA No. 66/98 dismissing the application filed by the petitioner raising a grievance against the order of compulsory retirement imposed upon the petitioner by way of penalty vide order dated 21. 09. 95 rendered by the appellate authority on appeal preferred by the petitioner against an order dated 31. 01. 95 issued by the disciplinary authority removing him from service on the basis of initiation of a disciplinary proceeding against him under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal Rules,) 1965, (for short 'the Rules' ).
(3.) THE facts leading to filing of this writ petition in a nutshell are that the petitioner, being an employee in the Department of Posts, while was working as Section Supervisor in the office of the Chief Post Master General, Assam Circle, had been nominated as one of the members of one Sub-Committee out of 8 Sub-Committee constituted by the Postal authority for conducting the 5th All India Postal. Lawn Tennis Tournament held at Guwahati from 28. 02. 90 to 02. 03. 90. The petitioner had been entrusted for carrying out various services/communications in connection with the said Tournament including the disbursement of amount to various persons like coaches, Umpires and purchase of mementoes etc. against the proper receipts. On 03. 06. 92 the petitioner was charged with the allegations that he had committed gross irregularities regarding certain vouchers of bills pertaining to the Tournament which were being contrary to the departmental rules and procedures. Denying all those charges, the petitioner submitted his reply/written statement on 11. 06. 92. A departmental inquiry was initiated against him and on 10. 01. 94 Inquiry Report was submitted by the Inquiry Officer who found the charges levelled against the petitioner proved except the vouchers 03. 01. , 30. 08. , 11. 3, 18. 11. The petitioner was served with the copy of the Inquiry report before any disciplinary action being taken. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority on the basis of the evidence on record and being satisfied with the proceeding of the inquiry held by the Inquiry Officer, came to the findings that the petitioner had made certain irregular payments and purchases against the advance amount of Rs. 40,000/- taken by him in connection with the Tournament but he failed to exercise due vigilance in spending from the public fund as required under the rules while being entrusted as disbursing officer who was made responsible for receiving all vouchers and for keeping proper accounts and accordingly the competent authority passed the order of, removal of the petitioner from service. On statutory appeal, filed by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the order of removal, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal vide order dated 21. 09. 95 modifying the penalty from removal from service to compulsory retirement as penalty after confirming the findings of the disciplinary authority.