LAWS(GAU)-2026-3-43

JYOTIRMOY CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

Decided On March 13, 2026
Jyotirmoy Choudhary Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Konwar, learned Addl. Advocate General for the respondent P&RD.

(2.) The petitioner before this Court by way of the present proceedings prays for setting aside the disciplinary proceedings, the order passed by the disciplinary authority dtd. 11/4/2013 and the consequential order of removal from service dtd. 26/4/2013.

(3.) The essential facts in the present lis are that the petitioner, at the relevant point in time was serving as an Extension Officer (Panc-hayat) as well as Incharge Block Development Officer of Katigorah Development Block under the Director of Panchayat and Rural Development, Panjabari, Guwahati. For alleged misappropriation of Rs.10,41,190.00 (Rupees Ten Lakh Forty One Thousand One Hundred Ninety) in implementing a scheme under I.A.Y. for the period of 2006- 2007, the petitioner was placed under suspension pending drawal of departmental proceedings by order dtd. 13/6/2008 bearing Memo No. RDD/125/2007/72-A. By show cause notice No.PDDE(II)25/2008/11-13 dtd. 19/7/2008, the petitioner was served with a show cause notice under Rule 9 of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1964 read with Article 311 of the Constitution of India lavelling three charges against the petitioner. The show cause notice served on the petitioner contained the statement of allegations that as in his capacity as Block Development Officer in Silchar Development Block, for the period 30/10/2006 to 4/4/2007, petitioner received a total amount of Rs.1,17,24,920.00 (Rupees One Crore Seventeen Lakh Twenty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty) against construction of IAY Houses from the Project Director, D.R.D.A. Cachar but he had shown a total expenditure of Rs.1,07,13,344.00 (Rupees One Crore Seven Lakh Thirteen Thousand Three Hundred Forty Four). He was therefore, charged with attempt to misappropriate Government money as the public fund was kept by him without dispersing it for the purpose for which it was drawn from the account.