SURINDER SHARMA Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in the present writ petition is to the order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short the Tribunal) on 20th August, 2002, whereby an Original application filed by the Petitioner challenging the imposition of punishment of dismissal of the Petitioner from service, was dismissed.

(2.) THE Petitioner, while working as Accounts Assistant was served with a charge -sheet for proceedings for imposing the major penalty. The charges against him were two fold. The first charge against the Petitioner is that at the time of getting into service, he has produced a fake B.A. Part II mark sheet with his application for the post of Welfare Inspector. The second charge was that while applying for IREM Appendix -Ill Examination for the years 1987, 1988 and 1989, the Petitioner has shown his qualification as B.A., whereas during the years 1990 and 1991, while applying for the said examination, the Petitioner reflected himself as graduate. However, the Petitioner is neither B.A. nor graduate and, thus, the Petitioner has misrepresented the facts.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner has vehemently argued that the order of punishment imposed upon the Petitioner is wholly unjustified as personal hearing was granted to the Petitioner by Shri G. S. Hira, who was the earlier Deputy Financial Advisor, but the order of punishment has been passed by Shri Anil Sainani. It is, thus, contended that the order of punishment is patently illegal and against the principles of natural justice. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has also relied upon Nagaraj Shivarao Karjagi v. Syndicate Bank Head Office Manipal : AIR 1991 S.C. 1507 and C.S.H.A. University v. B.D. Goyal (Civil Appeal No. 938 of 1999 decided on 22nd March, 2001).