Decided on February 16,2005

D.K.Tiwari Appellant


SUNIL KUMAR SINHA,J. - (1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashing the order dated 21.7.1978 (Annexure-D) passed by respondent No. 3, the Disciplinary Authority (The Divisional Manager) as also the order dated 25.1.1979 (Annexure-G) passed by the appellate authority, respondent No. 2 (The Zonal Manager) under the provisions of life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960.
(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Development Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the "Corporation") sometime in the year 1964. For the said post he had filled up the Application Form dated 313.1964 in which he had declared his academic qualification as "Matric passed and appeared in intermediate (result not out so far)". He has shown his date of birth as 6.5.1938.
(3.) On 12th July, 1977, the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet by the disciplinary authority in which it was specified that the Corporation has required the deposit of Original Matriculation Certificate from the petitioner which he could not deposit upto 28.3.1970 and for this reason a memo was issued to him on the said date. Various subsequent reminders were also issued to him and time was granted at the request of the petitioner upto 317.1976, but the petitioner failed to deposit the certificate. On 18.1.1977 he was again directed to submit the Matriculation Certificate within 10 days from the receipt of the above letter, but he again failed to deposit the same. However, a letter was sent by the petitioner for granting time upto 30.4.1977 which was granted by an official communication dated 17.2.1977 even then the order was not complied and in the said manner, the petitioner failed to comply and obey the orders and directions given to him in course of his official duty by the competent authority. The charge-sheet further specifies that by the aforesaid acts, the petitioner failed to obey and comply with the official instructions given to him and has acted in manner prejudicial to the good conduct and detrimental to the interest of the Corporation and has failed to maintain absolute integrity thereby violating the provisions of Regulations 21, 24 and 39(1) of the aforesaid Regulations of 1960 and was liable for one or more of the penalties as specified under Regulation 39(1) (a) to (o) of the said Regulations. A copy of the charge-sheet has been placed on record as Annexure R-1.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.