- (1.) Leave granted. Aggrieved by the grant of partial relief and consequential refusal of full relief by the High Court the Appellant has filed the present appeal.
(2.) We have heard the Learned Counsels for the parties.
(3.) The brief facts that will be required to be noticed are set out below: A charge-memo dated 21st March, 1996 was furnished to the Appellant leveling the following Charges. "Article I That Prof. K.P. Gupta while functioning as Head of Department, Chinese and Japanese Studies, is stated to have purchased a Computer PC-8088 for the Department from M/s. Astra Computer Services, Laxmi Bai Street, Darya Ganj, New Delhi-110002, on 16.2.1993 for Rs. 39,600/-. The said firm, namely, M/s. Astra Computer Services, was not a genuine firm and by purchasing the computer from such a firm, Prof. K.P. Gupta misused his position as Head of Department, which he was holding at the relevant time. Article II That Prof. K.P. Gupta, while functioning as the Head of Department of the Chinese and Japanese Studies, having purchased the said computer PC-8088 for the Department on 16.2.1993 kept the same at his residence unauthorisedly. The computer was brought in the Department only on 9.12.1993 after written complaints had been received by the University. Article III That Prof. K.P. Gupta, while functioning as the Head of Department of the Chinese and Japanese Studies did not maintain any proper record concerning purchase of the said computer PC-8088 for the Department." A departmental enquiry was ordered wherein the Appellant did not participate. At the conclusion of the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report dated 14th December, 1996 with the following findings. "I. The transaction relating to the purchase of the computer for which pre-receipted bill No. 80 dated 16th Feb. 1993 was said to have been submitted is FAKE. A non existent firm cannot be a party to a business transaction. II. All work relating to this fake transaction such as getting the bill forms printed, preparing the bill was done at the office of the Head of the Department. No dealer in computers was associated with this work in any capacity whatsoever. III. As such no computer was supplied by any to the Head of the Deptt. of Chinese and Japanese Studies either at his office or at his residence. Prof. K.P. Gupta did not have any computer belonging to the Deptt. at his residence. IV. Professor K.P. Gupta managed to get Cheque No. 958414 dated 22.3.93 for Rs. 39,600 from the University in the name of Astra Computer Services on the basis of this fake transaction. The proceeds of this cheque were collected from SBI Daryaganj by Shri Amitabh Saxena who was working as Lab. Attendant during this period at Professor K.P. Gupta's Department. V. Thus the University was defrauded of Rs. 39,600 on 14.4.1993 (the date when this cheque was cleared by SBI Delhi University) by using the fake bill. VI. As a consequence of the representations of the Faculty members of the Deptt. of Chinese and Japanese to the Vice Chancellor, Professor K.P. Gupta agreed to send the computer to the Deptt. on December 9, 1993. He, however, did not tell the whole truth. He did not tell (I) that no computer was received by the Deptt. against the payment of Rs. 39,600 by the University on 22nd March 1993 (ii) that a computer obtained by him from Data Point Computers is being sent to the Department. VII. Thus a part of the amount of Rs. 39,600 or the whole of it (depending upon the price of the computer obtained from Data Point Computers by Professor K.P. Gupta) may be regarded as returned to the University on 10 December 1993 of the money of which it was defrauded in April 1993.";