1993 (3) TMI 364

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ur. The allegation against the respondent is that during his tenure as such Cashier, lakhs of rupees credited in the accounts of the Market Committee were not deposited in its bank account. On leasing of the said misfeasance, the appellant - Market Committee suspended him from service with effect from 22nd March, 1991. He challenged his suspension in the High Court on the ground that some other suspended officers had been allowed to join service. The High Court quashed the suspension order on the said ground. 4. The investigation into the defalcation was, however, in progress. In April, 1991, special auditors were appointed to audit the accounts of the Market Committee. They submitted their -report in May, 1991 in which it was stated tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 22nd March, 1991 was quashed by the High Court on the ground that some other suspended officer had been allowed to join duties. That order had nothing to do with the merits of the case. Ordinarily, when there is an accusation of defalcation of the monies, the delinquent employees have to be kept away from the establishment till the charges are finally disposed of. Whether the charges are baseless, malicious or vindictive and are framed only to keep the individual concerned out of the employment is a different matter. But even in such a case, no conclusion can be arrived at without examining the entire record in question-and hence it is always advisable to allow the disciplinary proceedings to continue unhindered.It is possible that in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....spension in the same case. We are afraid that the High Court has misconstrued the nature and purpose of the power of suspension vested in the management. It is not disputed that at present all officers concerned are served with the charge-sheets and have been suspended. There is no discrimination between the officers on that account. The charges are also grave and the authorities have come to the conclusion that during the disciplinary proceedings, the officers should not continue in employment to enable them to conduct the proceedings unhindered. Hence, we are satisfied that the order in appeal was not justifed. 6. We, therefore, allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the High Court. The effect of this order will be that t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y report in which he indicated that if the 1st respondent had been alert in his duty as Secretary of the Market Committee, he could, have avoided the embezzlement. Hence, a charge-sheet was served upon the 1st respondent on 10th March, 1992 along with the suspension order of the same date. Against the order, the respondent approached the High Court and the learned Single Judge by his order of 2nd April, 1992 revoked the order of suspension. Against the said order, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Division Bench. By its order dated 8th May, 1992, the Division Bench upheld the revocation of the order of suspension but directed the appellants to complete the inquiry within a period of three months. Since, it was not possible for t....