J.K. Kaushik, Member (J) - (1.) SHRI Dhala Ram Choudhary has, inter alia, assailed the validity of order dated 06.10.2004, (Annexure.A/1) and also has prayed for declaring the same as void and non est, in addition to restraining the respondents from taking any further steps in furtherance thereto, amongst other reliefs.
(2.) The case was listed for admission. The learned Counsel for both the parties prayed for final disposal of the case at the stage of admission since a very short controversy was involved in the matter. We have, accordingly, heard the arguments advanced at the bar by both the learned Counsel for the parties and have also given our anxious thought and consideration to the pleadings and records of this case. The factual matrix of the case falls within a very narrow compass. The relevant and admitted material facts of this case are that the applicant was imposed with a penalty of reduction by two stages in the same time scale of pay of Rs. 5000-8000 from Rs. 7250 to 6950 with cumulative effect vide penalty order dated 13.08.2004. This order came to be passed under the signature of Director of Postal Services. The applicant has been issued with a show cause notice vide order dated 06.10.2004 by the Post Master General, purporting to be a notice under Rule 29(1)(v) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 (for brevity 'the Rules'), whereby the applicant has been informed that the authority intends to enhance the penalty to that of removal from service and the applicant is given an opportunity to submit his representation within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. Thereafter, the applicant has filed this O.A. before this bench of the Tribunal, which was pleased to stay the operation of the impugned order that has been extended from time to time. The Original Application has been grounded on a number of grounds inter-mixed with the pleadings relating to facts as well as in Para 4 and its sub-paras of grounds. It has been mentioned that the Post Master General has no authority to issue a notice enhancing the punishment and such a revision power can be exercised only by the Principal Chief Post Master General or Chief Post Master General of a circle.
(3.) AS regards the variances in the facts, it is stated by the respondents that the applicant was proceeded against with disciplinary case under Rule 14 of the Rules and the charges against him were fully proved whereby the competent authority has imposed the penalty. The applicant did not file any appeal within the stipulated period, After expiry of the prescribed period of appeal, the Post Master General, Western Region, Jodhpur, being the Appellate Authority, has chosen to exercise the power of revision under the Rule 29(1 )(iv) of the Rules and thereby issued the impugned notice. The grounds taken in the O.A. have been generally denied. The reply is followed by a rejoinder, almost reiterating the facts and grounds raised in the O.A. as well as refuting the grounds of defence set out in the reply. An additional affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the respondents.;