SANJAY KHANNA S/O M L KHANNA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH this OA applicant has challenged penalty of censure awarded in disciplinary proceedings against him. The learned Counsel of applicant pointed out that while the enquiry officer did not find applicant guilty of the alleged misconduct, the disciplinary authority disagreeing with the enquiry officer served dissenting note as also the enquiry report upon applicant vide Annexure A-3 dated 27.2.2004. The disciplinary authority after considering applicant's representation in response to Annexure A-3, vide Annexure A-6 dated 12.4.2004 imposed upon applicant penalty of reduction to a lower stage in time scale of pay by three stages for three years with further direction that he would not earn increments of pay during the period of such reduction and on expiry of this period, the reduction would have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay. Vide impugned orders Annexure A-1 dated 7.6.2006 the appellate authority after giving a personal hearing to applicant decided his appeal reducing the punishment to minor penalty of censure.

(2.) The learned Counsel of applicant contended that applicant was holding the post of UDC in the Vigilance Branch of the Directorate. He was not in charge of the enquiry records. He had not received the vigilance enquiry records relating to Y.P.Chaoudhary, ICD. As such, the enquiry officer had held applicant not guilty of the alleged misconduct. While the disciplinary authority wrongly disagreed with the enquiry officer, the orders of the appellate authority are not reasoned and speaking orders.

(3.) AS per Annexure A-2 dated 27.11.2002, the following charge was levelled against applicant: