S R VAISHNAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(GJH)-1983-12-17
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on
December 14,1983
S.R.VAISHNAV
Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
A. K. ROY CHOUDHURY V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]JUDGEMENT
S.A.SHAH,J. -
(1.)The petitioner who was at the relevant time Superintendent of Central Excise at Bhavnagar challenges the order of his compulsory retirement passed by the Collector of Customs & Central Excise at Ahmedabad dated 21-7-1976 produced at Annexure-F, and the appellate order passed by the Government of India dated 22nd September, 1977 at Annexure-G on the ground that the same are violative of the principles of natural justice and also bad on merits.
(2.)The short facts of this petition are as under : The petitioner was working as Superintendent of Central Excise at Bhavnagar, when he received a memorandum dated 4-11-1974 along with Articles of Charges and other relevant papers. The petitioner was charge-sheeted for three alleged delinquencies which are narrated in the order of the Collector at Annexure-F. Out of the three charges, Article III was not proved. So far as Charge-Article I is concerned the same has been proved partly to the extent of lack of devotion to duty, whereas the real charge mentioned in Article II is found to be proved.
(3.)The defence of the petitioner against these charges as reproduced by the competent authority, namely the Collector of Customs & Central Excise at page 67 is as under :
"The departmental witnesses including Shri Bakshi, Assistant Collector and his colleague Superintendent Shri Shillu were inimically disposed towards him and therefore their testimony ought not to be depended upon."
However, the competent authority has not believed the case of the petitioner that all these departmental witnesses were inimical towards him, and relying upon their evidence agreed that the finding of the Inquiry Officer that the charge contained in Article I has been partly proved and the charge contained in Article II has been fully proved, and therefore imposed punishment of compulsory retirement with effect from the date of service of the order. In appeal the Government of India appears to have passed a very laconic order confirming the finding of Collector of Customs and Central Excise.
(2.)The short facts of this petition are as under : The petitioner was working as Superintendent of Central Excise at Bhavnagar, when he received a memorandum dated 4-11-1974 along with Articles of Charges and other relevant papers. The petitioner was charge-sheeted for three alleged delinquencies which are narrated in the order of the Collector at Annexure-F. Out of the three charges, Article III was not proved. So far as Charge-Article I is concerned the same has been proved partly to the extent of lack of devotion to duty, whereas the real charge mentioned in Article II is found to be proved.
(3.)The defence of the petitioner against these charges as reproduced by the competent authority, namely the Collector of Customs & Central Excise at page 67 is as under :
"The departmental witnesses including Shri Bakshi, Assistant Collector and his colleague Superintendent Shri Shillu were inimically disposed towards him and therefore their testimony ought not to be depended upon."
However, the competent authority has not believed the case of the petitioner that all these departmental witnesses were inimical towards him, and relying upon their evidence agreed that the finding of the Inquiry Officer that the charge contained in Article I has been partly proved and the charge contained in Article II has been fully proved, and therefore imposed punishment of compulsory retirement with effect from the date of service of the order. In appeal the Government of India appears to have passed a very laconic order confirming the finding of Collector of Customs and Central Excise.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.