TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (3) TMI 233
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion, Sundernagar for the month of May, 1969 and entered the name of one Shri Ashok Kumar, Token No. 59-T at serial No. 10 on page 2 of the relevant pay roll. He made this entry with ulterior motive to withdraw the pay of Ashok Kumar for the month of May 1969, even though Ashok Kumar was not working in that Division. A bogus identity card in the name of Ashok Kumar T.No. 59-T with the signatures of the issuing officer was also prepared by the respondent although it was not his duty to prepare the identity card. The said fictitious identity card was used by one Suraj Singh, cleaner T.No. 210-K of Baggi Tunnelling Division for the purpose of withdrawing the pay of Ashok Kumar. While Suraj Singh by impersonation was receiving the pay of Ashok Kumar, he was recognised by the Cashier since he knew him personally. There then started an enquiry followed by departmental proceedings against three persons including the respondent herein. The Personnel Officer of the BSL Project was appointed as Inquiry Officer. The enquiry was conducted under the Punjab Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1966. The Inquiry Officer framed charge against the respondent in the following terms: "That the sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ine the adequacy of penalty awarded to the respondent. This is how the Tribunal dealt with that question : "Lastly, it was argued on behalf of the applicant that the punishment awarded to him is disproportionate to the gravity of the charge proved against him and is in stark contrast to the punishment awarded to his other three colleagues in whose cases, only future increments were stopped, the maximum being for three years in respect of Shri Sain Ditta, Clerk. The finding regarding the applicant being the master-mind behind the attempt to defraud the Project appears to have weighed with the disciplinary authority while dismissing the applicant from service. An appreciation of the evidence, as done in the preceding pages, would show that the applicant had entered the name of Shri Ashok Kumar in the pay roll for May, 1969 and so far as other evidence against him is concerned, it is mostly of a circumstantial nature. There is no direct or expert evidence that it was he who had marked the attendance of Shri Ashok Kumar in the pay roll for May, 1969 or that it was he who had initiated the identity card. The evidence against him is circumstantial inasmuch as the pay roll was under hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... services. This judicial review was sought to be taken away by the Constitution (42nd Amendment Act, 1976). By this amendment, Articles 323A and 323B were introduced in the Constitution, thereby opening altogether a new chapter in our Administrative law. Article 323A(1) which is relevant for our purpose is confined to matters relating to the public services. It provides power to Parliament to enact law for establishment of Administrative Tribunals for adjudication of disputes with regard to service matters. The service matters are of persons appointed to the public service and posts. The public sevice and posts may be in connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State. The law to be ernacted by Parliament may also cover persons appointed in the local or other authority or of any corporation owned or controlled by the Government. There should be onty one Tribunal for the Union of India and one for each State or for two or more States put together. The law cannot provide for hierarchy of Tribunals. In pursuance of Articles 323A(1) the Parliament enacted the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 ("The Act"). 4. We may briefly examine the statutory framework. Section 4 of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....services, being in either case, a post filled by a civilian; (b) all service matters concerning - xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx" Similar are the powers and authority of the State Service Tribunal under Section 15 and Joint Administrative Tribunal under Section 16. The expression "all courts" in this connection includes civil courts and High Court but not the Supreme Court. The powers of the Supreme Court for obvious reasons have been expressly kept undisturbed. The powers of the High Courts under Article 226, inso far as they are exercisable in relation to service matters stand conferred on the Tribunal established under the Act. The powers of other ordinary civil courts in relation to service matters to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance either expressly or impliedly barred also stand conferred on the Tribunal. This position becomes further clear by Sections 27, 28 and 29 of the Act Section 27 provides for finality of the orders of the Tribunal. Section 28 excludes the jurisdiction ofcourl sexcept the Supreme Court, or any Industrial Tribunal, labour Court, conceni ing service matters. Section 29 provides fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ained by other consideration. Indeed, the contention for the respondent is unsustainable in view of the decisions of this Court. 9. In State of Orissa v. Bidyabhushun [1963 (Suppl.) 1 SCR 648] the enquiry was conducted against the petitioner on several charges and eventually he was dismissed from service. The Orissa High Court found that the findings on two of the charges were bad being in violation of the principles of natural justice. The findings on the remaining charges were however, found to be justified. The High Court remitted the matter to the Government for fresh consideration for awarding a proper punishment. The High Court observed: "Thal the findings in respect of charges 1(a) and 1(e) should he sel aside as being opposed to the rules of natural justice, hut the findings in respect of charges 1(c) and 1(d) and charge. 2 need not be disturbed. It will be then left to Government to decide whether, on the basis of these charges, the punishment of dismissal should be maintained or else whether a lesser punishment would suffice." The Supreme Court reversed this order on the ground that if the dismissal could be supported on any finding as to substantial misdemeanour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt was, in our judgment, in error in directing the Governor of Orissa to reconsider the question." 10. In Dhirajlal Girdharilal v. Commissioner of Income-Tax (AIR 1956 SC 271), Mehar Chand Mahajan, C.J., while dealing with a reference application against an order of Income-Tax Tribunal under the Indian Income Tax Act had struck slightly a different note (at 273): "The learned Attorney General frankly conceded that it could not be denied that to a certain extent the Tribunal had drawn upon its own imagination and had made use of a number of surmises and conjectures in reaching its result. He however, contended that eliminating the irrelevant material employed by the Tribunal in arriving at its conclusion, there was sufficient material on which the finding of fact could be supported. In our opinion, this contention is not well founded. It is well established that when a court of facts acts on material, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriv ng at its finding. Such a finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material and thereby an issue of law a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issioner's conclusions would not be vitiated. The principle that if some of the reasons relied on by a Tribunal for its conclusion turn out to be extraneous or otherwise unsustainable, its decision would be vitiated, applies to cases in which the conclusion is arrived at not on assessment of objective satisfaction. The reason is that whereas in cases where the decision is based on subjective satisfaction if some of the reasons turn out to be irrelevant or invalid, it would be impossible for a superior court to find out which of the reasons, relevant or irrelevant, valid or invalid, had brought about such satisfaction. But in a case where the conclusion is based on objective facts and evidence, such a difficulty would not arise. If it is found that there was legal evidence before the Tribunal, even if some of it was irrelevant, a superior court would not interfere if the finding can be sustained on the rest of the evidence. The reason is that in a writ petition for certiorari, the superior court does not sit in appeal, but exercises only supervisory jurisdiction, and therefore, does not enter into the question of sufficiency of evidence. There was, in our view, legal evidence before....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e with the penalty on the ground that it is not commensurate with the delinquency of the official. The law already declared by this Court, which we reiterate, makes it clear that the Tribunals have no such discretion or power. 12. We must unequivocally state that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere with the disciplinary matters or punishment cannot be equated with an appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal cannot interfere with the findings of the Inquiry Officer or competent authority where they are not arbitrary or utterly perverse. It is appropriate to remember that the power to impose penalty on a delinquent officer is conferred on the competent authority either by an Act of legislature or rules made under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. If there has been an enquiry consistent with the rules and in accordance with principles of natural justice what punishment would meet the ends of justice is a matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of the competent authority. If the penalty can lawfully be imposed and is imposed on the proved misconduct, the Tribunal has no power to substitute its own discretion for that of the authority. The adequacy of penalty u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iminal court, the Tribunal may examine the adequacy of the penalty imposed in the light of the conviction and sentence inflicted on the person. If the penalty impugned is apparently unreasonable or uncalled for, having regard to the nature of the criminal charge, the Tribunal may step in to render substantial justice. The Tribunal may remit the matter to the competent authority for reconsideration or by itself substitute one of the penalties provided under clause (a). This power has been conceded to the court in Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel [1985(3) SCC 398] where Madon, J., observed (at 501-502): "Where a disciplinary authority comes to know that a government servant has been convicted on a criminal charge, it must consider whether his conduct which has led lo his conviction was such as warrants the imposition of a penalty and, if so, what that penalty should be ............................................................"The disciplinary authority must, however, bear in mind that a conviction on a criminal charge does not automatically entail dismissal, removal or reduction in rank of the concerned government servant. Having decided which of these three penalties is requir....