TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (3) TMI 291
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rdly ten days. These factors have not been taken into consideration by the Appellate Authority. In any case, it is for the Appellate Authority to see as to what would be the appropriate punishment in the light of only two charges, out of nine charges being established against the Petitioner. 33. In this view of the matter, impugned order of Disciplinary Authority as well as the Appellate Authority returning findings against the Petitioner on the third and fourth charge being established calls for no interference by this Court. However, since findings returned on the other charges are hereby quashed, therefore, Petitioner requires to be heard afresh by the Appellate Authority on the quantum of punishment. Penalty of removal from service imposed upon the Petitioner is hereby set aside and the Appellate Authority is directed to reconsider the proportionality of the punishment and to pass appropriate order regarding nature of punishment to be imposed upon the Petitioner, within four months of being apprised of this order. 34. With above said directions, this petition is allowed to the extent indicated above." 2. In view of the above judgment, all the charges against the petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd recommend accordingly." 5. On appeal being preferred, the Appellate Authority vide its order dated 11.02.1994 has recorded as under:- "The Disciplinary Authority on scrutinizing the records of the case concurred with the findings of the Inquiring Authority except with regard to charge Nos. (iii) & (iv) which he held as partly proved. Based on that view, the Disciplinary Authority recommended to the Chief General Manager, New Delhi, LHO, Appointing Authority that Shri Elhance be imposed a penalty of removal from service"; the period of suspension was also recommended to be treated as such. The Appointing Authority on an independent examination of the facts of the case agreed with the Disciplinary Authority‟s findings as also with the recommendations with regard to the quantum of penalty to be imposed. An order dated 27th April, 1993 was accordingly issued imposing on Shri Elhance the penalty of "removal from service" and the period of suspension was also treated as such." 6. Finally, the Appellate Authority has opined as under- "5. Having thus considered the various issues raised by the appellant, I am of the opinion that the appellant has not been able to convi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inter alia, be because of the poverty of the concerned person. It may be remembered that the framers of the Constitution permitted the High Courts to even strike down a Parliamentary enactment, on such a case being made out, and we have hesitated to concede the power of even substituting a punishment/penalty, on such case being made out. What a difference? May it be pointed out that Service Tribunals too, set up with the aid of Article 323-A have the power of striking down a legislative act. 22. The aforesaid has, therefore, to be avoided and I have no doubt that a High Court would be within its jurisdiction to modify the punishment/penalty by moulding the relief, which power it undoubtedly has, in view of long line of decision of this Court, to which reference is not deemed necessary, as the position is well settled in law. It may, however, be stated that this power of moulding relief in cases of the present nature can be invoked by a High Court only when the punishment/penalty awarded shocks the judicial conscience." 11. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that there is nothing on record that the Appellate Authority was unfair or biased and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... bills were not held fictitious or bogus but has been held against the petitioner is that he has furnished false information and claimed bills which are not in conformity with and contrary to the Service Rules for which he was imposed the penalty of 'removal from service'. Hence, making a false claim or furnishing any false information, as per Rule 80(12) of the SBI Rules, were proved. Therefore, the scope of judicial review is limited on the decision making process and not the decision. 15. On the quantum of punishment, the learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon a case Indian Railways Construction Co. Ltd. Vs. Ajay Kumar, 2003 (4) SCC 579, wherein the Supreme Court has observed as under:- " Therefore, to arrive at a decision on "reasonableness" the Court has to find out if the administrator has left out relevant factors or taken into account irrelevant factors. The decision of the administrator must have been within the four corners of the law, and not one which no sensible person could have reasonably arrived at, having regard to the above principles, and must have been a bona fide one. The decision could be one of many choices open to the authority but it was f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....artmental enquiry is extremely limited. The same is confined to adjudging the lack of jurisdiction, jurisdictional error, reasonableness of the decision, arbitrariness, discriminatory, violation of principles of natural justice, malice." 20. In the case of Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Nanhe Lal Kushwaha, 2009 (8) SCC 772, wherein the Supreme Court has observed as under:- "It is not only the amount involved but the mental set-up, the type of duty performed and similar relevant circumstances which go into the decision-making process while considering whether the punishment is proportionate or disproportionate. If the charged employee holds a position of trust where honesty and integrity are inbuilt requirements of functioning, it would not be proper to deal with the mater leniently. Misconduct in such cases has to be dealt with iron hands. Where the person deals with public money or is engaged in financial transactions or acts in a fiduciary capacity, the highest degree of integrity and trustworthiness is a must and unexceptionable." 21. On the issues of misconduct, the learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon a case of Ganesh Santa Ram Sirur ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Making a false claim for payment of transport charges of household luggage and car to Chandigarh was a serious matter bordering on moral turpitude. Breach of the rule requiring him to clear his electricity dues upon his transfer from the place of his posting was also not credit worthy for an officer. The competent authority was therefore justified in taking the view that the nature of the misconduct proved against the appellant called for a suitable punishment." 25. On hearing ld. Counsels for the parties it is emerged that initially there were 9 charges against the petitioner. Charge No. 1 to 5 & 9 were proved and charge No. 6 to 8 not proved. The disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of removal from service, which was maintained by the appellate authority. 26. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed W.P. (C) No. 4901/1993. Same was disposed of vide order dated 22.09.2009 as referred above whereby this Court held that 3rd and 4th charge alone have withstood the judicial scrutiny, therefore, the quantum of punishment needs to be looked into afresh by the appellate authority. It is further recorded that the impugned order of the disciplinary authority as well as the appe....