TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (10) TMI 1337
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e as under :- The respondent was appointed as an Inspector of Supplies on the post which had been reserved for SC/ST candidates. It was reported to the Government Authorities that, in fact, the respondent was not belonging to either SC or ST and therefore, proceedings were to be initiated against him so as to ascertain whether the information received was correct. Though the proceedings had been initiated, by an order dated 16th October, 1995, the said proceedings had been dropped. Thereafter, on 4th September, 2000, the aforesaid decision with regard to closing the proceedings under order dated 16th October, 1995 had been reconsidered and a notice was issued to the respondent with regard to initiation of the departmental proceedings. 4. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reviewed on 4th September, 2000. Therefore, no proceedings could have been initiated against the respondent in pursuance of the said order dated 4th September, 2000. 8. The submissions advanced before the Tribunal, the High Court and before this Court on behalf of the respondent-employee were to the effect that under Rule 31 of the Rules only the Governor has the power to take any order in review whereas under Rule 32 of the Rules, the appellate-authority can take any order into review, but in the instant case, none could have reviewed the order dated 16th October, 1995. The aforestated two Rules have been reproduced hereinbelow :- "31. Governor's power to review - Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, the Governor may,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s own motion or otherwise, call for the records of the case in a disciplinary proceeding, review any order passed in such a case and, after consultation with the Commission, where such consultation is necessary, pass such orders as it deems fit as if the Government servant had preferred an appeal against such order : Provided that no action under this rule shall be initiated more than six months after the date of the order to be reviewed." 9. It had been submitted on behalf of the respondent-employee that in the instant case, the order dated 4th September, 2000 was not passed by the Governor and therefore, the power under Rule 31 of the Rules had not been exercised. So far as Rule 32 of the Rules is concerned, there is a period of limitati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed judgment as well as the order passed by the Tribunal dated 27th November, 2008. We have also gone through the relevant orders placed on record before this Court by both the parties. 13. Upon hearing the learned counsel and looking to the provisions of the Rules we are of the view that the order dated 4th September, 2000, reviewing the order dated 16th October, 1995 was not in accordance with the Rules. By virtue of the order dated 16th October, 1995, it was decided to drop the departmental proceedings initiated against the respondent-employee and the said decision was taken in review by virtue of the order dated 4th September, 2000 and upon review, the order dated 16th October, 1995 was set aside and it was decided to initiate proceedin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fter more than six months, the order would be bad if it was passed under Rule 32 of the Rules. Thus, initiation of proceedings in pursuance of order dated 4th September, 2000 was bad and rightly held so by the Tribunal and confirmed by the High Court. 16. Upon perusal of both the aforestated Rules, it is clear that an order, passed by the Government Authorities, can be reviewed. So far as Rule 32 of the Rules is concerned, in a disciplinary case the Appellate Authority can review the order but the Authority can review the order within six months from the date of passing of that order and thereafter the order cannot be reviewed as specified in the proviso to Rule 32 of the Rules. 17. So far as the power of the Governor with regard to revie....