UNION OF INDIA Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned order dtd. 9/5/2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.1-Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal'), by which the Original Application filed by respondent No.2 stands allowed, on the ground that the same is perverse.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are only aggrieved against the order passed by the Tribunal, wherein it has been mentioned that a detailed enquiry needs to be conducted before imposing the punishment even if the punishment sought to be impugned is minor. Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that for imposing the minor penalty, as per Rule 16 of Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'CCS (CCA)Rules, 1965'), only a show cause notice is to be given and after considering the reply/representation so filed, appropriate speaking order is to be passed whether the punishment is to be imposed or not. Whereas, the Tribunal has gone on the fact that once, respondent No.2 has denied the allegation alleged against him, even for the imposition of a minor penalty of recovery, a detailed enquiry has to be conducted, is incorrect and the said direction is contrary to the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2-Ved Prakash submits that even for imposing the minor penalty, the process has not been followed as the order so passed was totally cryptic and non-speaking and does not give the detail as to how or on what basis, the punishment has been imposed upon respondent No.2. The learned counsel submits that once the charges were denied by delinquent employee, while passing an order still the competent authority was required to pass a speaking order as to what weighed in the mind of the authority so as to prove the said allegation in order to impose the punishment as per principles of natural justice, which process was not undertaken and the Tribunal has rightly set aside the order of punishment.