MAHADEO BHUIAN Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Office order dated 31.1.2014, Annexure-4, issued by the Staff Officer (Mining), Kuju Area of the respondent-CCL imposing the punishment upon the petitioner has two parts--(i) stoppage of one annual increment with cumulative effect and he would not be posted at sensitive post during his service career, and (ii) the petitioner, who is a senior cashier, has been posted at Karma Project to work as a Pitman/Dumpman. The petitioner, while holding the post of senior cashier under the respondent, was proceeded under charge-sheet-cum-suspension order dated 22.3.2013, Annexure-3 for the alleged misconduct inter alia stating as follows:--

(2.) That the petitioner had obtained a draft of Rs. 10,000/- dated 3.10.2012 for deposit in favour of the Secretary, Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, which he actually did not deposit neither he has informed the said office. The negligence on the part of the petitioner was likely to result in initiation of proceeding against the respondent organization. Apart from that though he had obtained several cheques issued in favour of certain persons from the Finance Department, he did not issue the same. The respondent-organization had received complaint of financial irregularity against him. It showed that he was negligent in duty, which conduct amounted to dereliction in duty. After a departmental enquiry, the aforesaid punishment has been imposed upon him, which has been challenged by the petitioner on the ground that no copy of the enquiry report was served as per the requirement of the standing order upon the petitioner before the impugned order has been passed. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been transferred from the post of senior cashier to another post belonging to a different cadre of Pitman/Dumpman, which is impermissible in view of the standing order specially Rule 21, which relates to transfer. It is submitted that the nature of job of a senior cashier is not similar to that of a Pitman/Dumpman; while the senior cashier has to deal with accounts and the cash section in the office, a Pitman/Dumpman has to work at the mine and in three shifts unlike the senior cashier. The impugned action of the respondent would affect the petitioner's seniority in his parent cadre, therefore, such action is impermissible in view of the judgment relied upon by the petitioner such, rendered by the learned Single Judge in the case of Prakash R. Borkar vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors, 1984 1 BCR 95 It is also alleged that the impugned transfer is punitive in nature, which is not sustainable in the eye of law.

(3.) The respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner was proceeded against for financial irregularity as is evident from the charge-sheet and after due enquiry it was found that the petitioner was not fit to hold a sensitive post in the accounts office/cash section. It is further submitted that the apprehension of the petitioner that his cadre has been changed is not correct as he remains in the parent cadre and his seniority/promotion would not be affected. The cadre to which he has been transferred is also a clerical cadre and it does not change the nature of the job of the petitioner.