B.P.SINHA Vs. CHAIRMAN AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who was holding the post of Deputy Chief Material Manager in Grade E -5 in the Purchase Department of Bokaro Steel Plant was charge -sheeted and was proceeded depart - mentally for the following charges quoted hereinbelow : - - "It has been reported that Sri B.P. Sinha while processing the case for procurement of G.I. Pipes issued LTE to M/s Steel Man and had thus committed the following act of commission and omission : Sri B.P. Sinha issued inquiry to M/s Steel Man for supply of G.I. Pipes without approved from GM (MMJ/ED (MM) as the party is not registered with BSL for G.I. Pipes. The party is registered with BSL for supply of some other items. By the aforesaid acts of omission and commission, Sri B.P. Sinha has contravened clause Nos. 4.0(i)(ii) and 5.0(5) of the Conduct Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1977.

(2.) THE detail of the charges was that an MPR dated 13.10.1997 was raised for supply of G.I. Pipes at an estimated cost of Rs. 1,94,000.00 . For procurement of the materials. Limited Tender Enquiry dated 4.2.1998 was issued to seven firms including M/s. Steel Man as per the recommendation of the Indenting Department. All the seven firms submitted their quotation including M/s. Steel Man which emerged as the 1 -1 tenderer. It was said that M/s, Steel Man was registered with the Bokaro Steel Plant for the items Rubber Bush, Low Pressure Water Hose, Fasteners and Screws and GM Valves only and the said firm was not registered for G.I. Pipes. It is said that the petitioner being the Purchase Officer, wrongly issued Limited Tender Enquiry (LTE) to the firm M/s. Steel Man for supply of G.I. Pipes though the said firm was not registered for the G.I. Pipes. It was further said that the LTE was issued to the said firm M/s. Steel Man, without approval of the competent authority and thereby the petitioner contravened clause Nos. 4.0 (i) and (ii) and 5.0 (5) of the Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1977.

(3.) FROM the Enquiry Report, it appears that the Enquiry Officer on assessment of the evidence adduced in the proceeding found the following facts : - -