SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
12th October, 1959.
B.P. SINHA, C.J.I., S. JAFER IMAM, J.L. KAPUR, K.N. WANCHOO AND K.C. DAS GUPTA, JJ.
M. Narasimhachar, Appellant
Versus
The State of Mysore, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 438 of 1958.
Appellant in person. M/s B. R. L. Iyengar and T. M. Sen, Advocates, for Respondent.
-held, question of reduction of pension is not dealt with under Art. 311(2). Reduction in rank is in respect of public servant who is still to serve after reduction.
Judgment
WANCHOO, J. : This is an appeal by special leave against an order of the Mysore High Court in a service matter. The appellant was in the service of the Mysore State. In 1951 he was the manager of the Government Reserve Foodgrains from Pandavapura. He was transferred from Pandavapura on 15-5-1951, and handed over charge of the Depot to one Shri Srinivasachar that there was shortage of 27 pallas of ragi in the stock handed over to him. Thereupon an enquiry was held by the Sub-Division Officer. The appellant was dissatisfied with the enquiry as according to him it had not been properly conducted. He therefore complained against the Sub-Division Officer and also brought it to the notice of the higher authorities that certain rooms containing stock of gunny bags had been sealed and the seals were not allowed to be broken till 24-3-1952, with the result that a large number of gunny bags which were stocked there had deteriorated and had been eaten by white-ants. It appears that these preliminary enquiries went on till August 1952 when the appellant was appointed Special Revenue Inspector under the Assistant Director of Food Supplies. He went to take over charge of the new post in September 1952 but was not allowed to do so by an order of 12-9-1952. He then approached the higher authorities but was suspended on 29-12-1952. On 4-4-1953, the following charges were framed against him-
(1) that he had taken 11 months to hand over charge of the Reserve Depot to his successor with a view to concealing the irregularities in the management of the Depot;
(2) that he had failed to hand over detailed charge by counting the gunny bags;
(3) that he had failed to obtain specific orders of the Amildar to stock the new gunny bags in the mill and his object was to effect surreptitious sale of the gunny bags;
(4) that he had not maintained a regular account in regard to the bags and that he had failed to get them checked by superior officers to escape his accountability for the loss of about 11,000 bags;
(5) that he had deliberately mixed husk with ragi and thereby cheated government to the extent of 27 pallas of ragi ;
(6) that he had manipulated the account; and
(7) that he had failed to get the stock checked every month by the Amildar and other superior officers.
2. The appellant submitted a reply to the charges and made several representations to various officers in that behalf. Eventually he received a notice on 23-11-1953, from the Director of Food Supplies directing him to appear in connection with the enquiry relating to the shortage in the Reserve Depot. Subsequently, an enquiry was held by the Personal Assistant to the Director who made a report thereafter. Finally, a notice was issued to the appellant by the Government on 30-12-1954, that six of the seven charges framed against him (except the charge relating to 27 pallas of ragi) had been proved on enquiry and he was asked to show cause within one week from the date of the receipt of the notice why he should not be compulsorily retired from service, why the period of suspension should not be treated as such leave to which he might be entitled and why the leave allowances due to him, his insurance amount and 50 per cent. of his pension should not be adjusted towards the amount due from him on account of the shortage of gunny bags valued at Rs. 5,215. The appellant submitted a long explanation in reply to this notice. In the meantime the appellant had attained the age of 55 years. Therefore, the Government passed an order on 18-3-1955, in the following terms-
"(1) That Shri M. Narasimhachar be retired from service from the date on which he attained superannuation and granted under Art. 302 (b) of the Mysore Services Regulations (hereinafter referred to as Regulations), a reduced pension of two-thirds the amount to which he would ordinarily be entitled in view of the irregularities committed by him.
(2) That the period of suspension be treated as leave to which he is entitled.
(3) That the cost
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.