1982 (8) TMI 226

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r reads as follows: No. C-16013/1/74-Spl GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING, Dated New Delhi-1, the 10th September, 1974. ORDER WHEREAS an Inquiry under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 was held against Shri S.K. Majumdar, former Projectionist. Field Exhibition Unit, Gauhati in respect of the following charges: (i) that he in connection with exhibition at Hojai, intentionally showed false attendance of the workers engaged in the exhibition in the muster rolls and there by facilitated showing of Inflated payment of ₹ 230.50 and; (ii) that be in connection with the exhibition at Haflong. Nowgong. Hojai and Karimganj, wrongfully arranged the transpor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onist in and was attached to the field Exhibition Office under the (SIC) of Advertising and visual Publicity, Ministry of nation and Broadcasting and was posted at Gauhati at the (SIC) time. On 25.1.68/4.2.68, the Petitioner was placed under (SIC) on the ground that a Departmental proceeding was templated against him by order of Respondent No. 3, being 1/9/67 v. dated 25.1.68/4.2.68. Consequently the Articles of argee were issued against the Petitioner and they read as under: That the said Shri S.K. Mazumdar, while functioning as Projectionist at Field Exhibition Unit, Gauhati during 1967 did not maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty inasmuch as: 1. He, in connection with expenditure of holding exhibitions at Hojai Intentionall....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he (SIC) rules, the appellate authority shall consider. (a) Whether the procedure laid down in these rules has been complied with and if not, whet-her such non-compliance has resulted in the Violation of any provisions of the Constitution of India or in the failure of justice; (b) Whether the findings of the disciplinary authority are warranted by the evidence on record; and, (c) Whether the penalty or the enhanced penalty imposed is adequate, inadequate, or severe ; (SIC) pass order- confirming, enhancing, reducing, or setting aside the penalty ; or (ii) remitting the case to the authority which imposed or enhanced the penalty or to any other authority with such direction as it may deem fit in the circumstances of the case: (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is to dispose of the appeal and decide the matter between the parties. In this case, clearly the appellate authority has not done anything in the matter in conformity with the provisions of Rule 27 of the Rules. In the penultimate paragraph of the impugned order, the appellate authority has simply said: And WHEREAS the said appeal has been examined carefully by the undersigned and he finds no justification to interfere with the decision already taken in the matter by the Disciplinary Authority", This is not the way how the appeal should have been disposed of by the appellate authority. 5. A similar question of law came up for consideration by a Division Bench of this Court in Pashupati Banerjee v. Deputy Engineer (North), North Eas....