Debasish Kar Gupta , J. - (1.) Both the aforesaid writ applications are filed challenging a judgment dated December 16, 2016 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in original application bearing O.A. No.758 of 2014. The former one bearing W.P.S.T. No.114 of 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the first W.P.S.T.- I) is filed by the respondents/writ petitioners and the latter one bearing W.P.S.T. No.123 of 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the second W.P.S.T.-II) is filed by the applicant/writ petitioner on the grounds as will be discussed hereunder. The operative portion of the impugned judgment is quoted below:- "16. In view of the above, having regard to the facts of the case, we find some merit in the present application before us. The application, therefore, partly succeeds. Accordingly, for the reasons discussed above, we are of the view that only Charge I has been partly established against the applicant inasmuch as on 09-01-2008 he gained unauthorised access to the office computer and tinkered with the same causing deletion of the name of a recorded bargadar, albeit without any mala fide intent. In our opinion, the punishment of withholding of 3 (three) annual increments with cumulative effect imposed by the Disciplinary Authority, by his order dated 5th May, 2014, would be too harsh and shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct of the applicant and a lesser punishment is called for in this case to meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, we modify the impugned final order passed by the Disciplinary Authority to the extent that the punishment imposed on the applicant be modified to the penalty of censure only. We also direct the respondent authorities, particularly Respondent no.2 i.e. Land Reforms Commissioner and Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal, that all consequential benefits admissible to applicant under the rules shall have to be paid to him within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order."
(2.) The fact of the case in a nutshell is this:- The petitioner was served with a charge sheet dated February 10, 2009 while he was working for gain in the post of Special Revenue Officer, Grade-II and was posted in Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Keshiary, Purba Medinipur levelling the following charges against him:- (i) The petitioner, while posted as Revenue Officer, at the Office of Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Sabong, District- Paschim Medinipur on January 9, 2008, tampered with the informations loaded in the computer of a Lower Division Clerk taking advantage of his absence and deleted the name of one Shri Rajendra Nath Jana, son of Bhusan Jana of village Mohar, a recorded bargadar, L.R. Khatian No.1630 in respect of Plot nos.1481 & 1483, Mouza Mohar, J.L. No.397, Police Station-Sabong, with mala fide intention. (ii) On 09.01.2008 while functioning as Revenue Officer at the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Sabong Shri Shankar Mukhopadhyaya, petitioner in W.P.S.T.-II, unauthorisedly entered into the office computer and generated a print-out of L.R. Khatian no.1630 of mouza Mohar, J.L. No.397, P.S. Sabong after deleting the name of a bargadar therefrom. (iii) The petitioner disposed of a proceeding bearing no. O.B.C. Case No.23/2006 which had been initiated out of a claim raised by one Shri Rajendra Nath Jana, son of Bhusan Jana of village Mohar for recording his name as bargadar against Plot nos.1481 & 1483 comprised in L.R. Khatian No.1630, Mouza Mohar, J.L. No.397. Though the above proceeding was closed, the petitioner did not hand over the case records to the office to deprive the above bargadar of his rights by tampering with the computer data base and deleting the name of the above bargadar with mala fide intention.
(3.) The above act on the part of the petitioner was gross misconduct for ill motive, inconsistent of faithful discharge of his duty and adverse to the integrity in his performance.;