- (1.) The respondent was working as a Block Level Accountant in 1986 in Valangaiman. He was transferred to Kumbakonam Block and was relieved in the afternoon of 8-7-1986.
(2.) During the period when the respondent was working as Block Level Accountant at Valangaiman, it was found that there was shortage in the stocks of wheat and rice. There was a loss of 30 metric tons of wheat and 3 metric tons of rice valued at Rs. 51,300/-. Thereupon, initially the Block Development Officer issued orders for recovery of the amount from the respondent. The District Collector set aside the order of the Block Development Officer and directed him to pass appropriate orders after holding a proper enquiry. On 18-9-88, the respondent was placed under suspension pending enquiry. He was served with a chargesheet containing three charges. The first charge was related to his making unauthorised entries of deduction in the stock register on various dates relating to different quantities of foodgrains as specified in the charge. The second charge was that he was responsible for a large scale misappropriation of food stock in his custody and the third charge was that by his above action, he has caused loss to the Government. After hearing the respondent and examining the witnesses, the Enquiry Officer submitted a report dated 13-11-1989 holding the respondent guilty of the charges. The respondent was thereupon given a further hearing by the District Collector while considering the Enquiry Officer's report. The respondent was also given an opportunity to make a representation against the findings in the Enquiry Officer's report. After examining his representation, the disciplinary authority, namely, the District Collector passed a final order dated 4-6-91. The disciplinary authority, after examining the report of the Enquiry Officer and considering the respondent's representation, has come to the conclusion that various quantities of wheat and rice were deducted from the stock register by the respondent by making entries in his own handwriting unauthorisedly on various dates specified therein and stating in his own handwriting that damage was caused due to rate and heavy rain. This defence of the respondent has been disbelieved by the Enquiry Officer as well as by the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority has held that all the charges have been proved against the respondent.
(3.) Thereafter in his order, the disciplinary authority has observed that as the delinquent is due to retire very soon from service on 30-6-91, a lenient view is taken and a stoppage of increments for two years without cumulative effect is ordered for the gross negligence and unauthorised entries in the stock register. The disciplinary authority has also directed that the loss of Rs. 51,300/- which has been caused by misappropriation of the stock of foodgrains be recovered in one lump sum from the respondent before his retirement on superannuation failing which the entire amount will be recovered from his retirement benefits. The period of suspension was also directed to be treated as service period but without pay.;