- (1.) Challenge is to the actions/steps taken in the matter of disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner. The following facts are not in dispute and they are etymologized below:- i) That the petitioner was appointed Accounts Officer in the office of the respondent no.1 in 1998. A disciplinary proceeding was started against the petitioner in respect of four articles of charge as contained in Annexure P- 22 at page no.123. The petitioner was directed to specifically admit or deny each article of charge. He was informed that an enquiry would be conducted in respect of those articles of charge as were not admitted; ii) That the petitioner submitted a written statement against each article of charge denying the material allegations raised therein; iii) That thereafter, the petitioner was informed that pursuant to his written statement, an Inquiring Authority and a Presenting Officer on behalf of the prosecution were appointed for the purpose of the disciplinary proceeding; iv) That thereafter, the Inquiring Authority explained the articles of charge to the petitioner to which the petitioner denied each article of charge; v) That thereafter, the Inquiring Authority asked the petitioner certain questions and answers given by the Charged Officer, i.e., the petitioner, the same had been recorded in the form of questions and answers as the deposition of the Charged Officer;vi) That thereafter, the Inquiring Authority started examination of the prosecution witnesses. The Presenting Officer presented the witnesses. The witnesses gave their statements and the Charged Officer was allowed to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses and he did; and vii) That at this stage, (i.e. recording of deposition of the P.W.s) this application has been filed challenging the disciplinary proceeding and for other consequential reliefs. Now, the question is whether the reliefs sought for in the application can be granted.
(2.) Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on going through the materials on record, I find that the articles of charge are over tampering of the figures to enhance from Rs.6,89,630.87 to Rs.9,05,419.00 by adding three more items subsequently without the approval or knowledge of the Purchase Committee in respect of furniture of the Office, generation of fictitious wage/overtime bill, false statement and false declaration in Form No.16 with regard to income tax matter. The Charged Officer denied each and every articles of charge by filing a written statement thereon. Thereafter, the Inquiring Authority explained the articles of charge to the Charged Officer and the Charged Officer had denied the articles of charge.
(3.) At that stage, the Inquiring Authority was expected to ask the prosecution to bring the witnesses/materials in respect of the articles of charge and the Charged Officer would be given an opportunity to cross-examine or explain those materials. After the completion of the evidence on behalf of the prosecution, the Inquiring Authority is to allow the Charged Officer to adduce defence evidence including the examination of the Charged Officer himself, if he desires to do so. After the closer of the evidence on behalf of both the sides, the Inquiring Authority is to hear out over the evidence on record, materials available etc., in the disciplinary proceeding and thereafter, he shall come to a definite finding whether the Charged Officer is guilty of any of the articles of charge or not by passing a reasoned order. This is, in short, called the natural justice.;