STATE OF J & K Vs. KRISHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Court is not to act as a Court of appeal and re- appreciate the findings recorded by Disciplinary authorities. Such is the state of law discernible from various pronouncements beginning from early sixties. One such case is reported as State of Andhra Pradesh v. S. Shri Rama Rao, 1963 AIR(SC) 1723. This view has been consistently expressed in the later decisions. Recent decisions are Indian Oil Corporation v. Ashok Kumar Arora, 1997 AIR(SC) 1030 and Govt. of Tamil Nadu v. K.N. Ramamurthy, 1997 AIR(SC) 3571. The only exception to the above general preposition stands carved out when the decision given by the Supreme Court in the case reported as Managing Director ECIL v. K. Karunakaran, 1994 AIR(SC) 1074 is perused. In the above case, there was failure to supply the delinquent Government servant with the copy of the enquiry report. Supreme Court of India was of the view that merely because the enquiry report has not been made available should not lead the Courts to quash the order of punishment but they should apply their judicial mind to the question and find out if the furnishing of the enquiry proceedings and the report would have made any difference to the resultant order passed against the delinquent. It is only after this exercise is completed, the order of punishment should be set aside.

(2.) In the present case, the Respondent Krishan Lal was not supplied with the copy of the enquiry report. The Supreme Court of India has remitted the case for appreciating the material of the record and to find out if any prejudice has been caused to the Respondent on account of above procedural lacuna. It is keeping in view this aspect of the matter, the arguments addressed by both sides in this appeal are being appreciated.

(3.) On a complaint having been filed by one Tula Ram, the allegations came to be enquired into by Anti Corruption Commission constituted under the provisions of J&K (Government Servants Prevention of Corruption) Act, 1962. Tula Ram referred to above who made the complaint was a Company Commander with the Home Guards of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The allegations contained in the complaint were to the effect that one A.N. Mehta the then Company Commandant Home Guards Poonch and the appellant Krishan Lal Office Clerk to the above Commandant Home Guards Poonch abused their official position and fraudulently and dishonestly mis-appropriated a sum of Rs. 1,800/- from the Government funds. As to how this mis-appropriation took place was elaborated by the State. It was alleged that false entries were made in the attendance register regarding one person by the name of Mohammad Iqbal. This was for the month of February and March 1971. On the basis of this entry pay bill was prepared and salary was drawn. The other allegation was that from time to time false entries vis-a-vis another non-existing persons were made in the attendance register for the months of April to November, 1971. These persons were Mohd. Iqbal and Mehraj-ud-din. It was accordingly alleged that the aforementioned Company Commander A.N. Mehra and Respondent Krishen Lal mis- appropriated Government funds to the tune of Rs. 1,800/-. The sum and substance of the complaint was that even though the aforementioned two persons never attended and never did any duty with the office of the Commandant Home Guards Poonch, money was drawn from the Government Treasury and this was mis- appropriated.