JUDGEMENT
Shah, J. -
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The notice issued by this Court is limited to the interpretation given by the High Court to Regulation 60 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the Regulations") which prescribes the procedure for imposing minor penalties. In Writ Petition No.14152 of 1989 filed by respondent No. 1-Assistant Manager (Quality Control) at Kakinada challenging the order imposing penalty of recovery of Rs. 7356/- from his pay by 21 monthly instalments on the ground of dereliction of his duties, which caused loss to the Corporation, learned single Judge held that once the employee denies the charge, it is incumbent upon the authorities to conduct an inquiry by giving an opportunity to him and render findings on the charges, otherwise there is every scope for the disciplinary authority to misuse the power under Regulation 60. The Court, therefore, set aside the order imposing minor penalty as the procedure contemplated for imposing major penalty was not followed. In appeal the Division Bench of the High Court by judgment and order dated 18th November, 1997 confirmed the same by observing - "where the employee disputes that any loss is caused to the Corporation either by his negligence or breach of order, and if so, how much pecuniary loss has been incurred, it is but necessary that an enquiry should be conducted, otherwise it is impossible to arrive at a correct finding with regard to the causing of loss by the employee by his negligence or breach of order and with regard to the quantum of loss." The aforesaid interpretation of Rules given by the High Court is challenged in this appeal.
(3.) For deciding the question involved, we would first refer to the relevant procedure prescribed nder Regulations 54 and 60 which read thus :-
"54. Minor Penalties :
(i) Censure;
(ii) withholding of his promotion;
(iii) recovery from his pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused by him to the Corporation by negligence or breach of orders;
(iv) withholding of increments of pay :
60. PROCEDURE FOR IMPOSING MINOR PENALTIES :
(1) SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-REGULTION (3) OF REGULATION 59, NO ORDER IMPOSING ON AN EMPLOYEE ANY OF THE PENALTIES SPECIFIED IN CLAUSE (I) to (iv) of Regulation 54 shall be made except after :
(a) informing the employee in writing of the proposal to take action against him and of the imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour on which it is proposed to be taken, and giving him a reasonable opportunity of making such representation as he may wish to make against the proposal;
(b) holding an inquiry in the manner laid down in Sub-regulations (3) to (23) of Regulation 58, in every case in which the disciplinary authority is of the opinion that such inquiry is necessary;
(c) taking the representation, if any, submitted by the employee under clause (a) and the record of inquiry if any, held under clause (b) into consideration:
(d) recording a finding on each imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (b) of Sub-regulation (1), if in a case it is proposed, after considering the representation, if any, made by the employee under clause (a) of the sub-regulation, to withhold increment of pay and such withholding of increments is likely to affect adversely the amount of retirement benefits payable to the employee or to withhold increments of a pay for a period exceeding 3 years or to withhold increments of pay with cumulative effect for any period, an inquiry shall be held in the manner laid down in sub-regulations (3) to (23) of Regulation 58 before making any order imposing on the employee any such penalty.
(3) The record of the proceedings in such cases shall include :
(i) a copy of the intimation to the employee of the proposal to take action against him;
(ii) a copy of the statement of imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour delivered to him;
(iii) his representation, if any;
(iv) the evidence produced during the inquiry;
(v) the findings on each imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour, and
(vi) the orders on the case together with the reasons therefor." ;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.