Judgment

KANIA, C.J.I.:- These appeals are directed against two orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the tribunal"). By the first impugned order the appellant was restrained from proceeding further with the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent in terms of the charge-sheet dated March 13, 1989, filed by the appellant. This order was passed by the Vacation Bench of the Tribunal on June 27, 1991.

2. The second order sought to be challenged is an order dated July 15, 1991 whereby the tribunal directed that in case the commuted value of the pension, payable to the respondent was refunded, the respondent should be paid the full value of the pension from the due date including the arrears pending the proceedings before the tribunal.

3. We propose to set out only a few facts. At the relevant time, the respondent was an Income-tax Officer posted at New Delhi. On March 13, 1989, a memorandum of charges or charge-sheet was served on the respondent. The first article of charge was to the effect that the respondent while functioning as an Income-tax Officer completed certain assessments in an irregular manner, designed to confer undue benefit on the assessees concerned. The statement of imputations for misconduct and misbehaviour was forwarded along with the charge-sheet.

4. The first case dealt with is that of Master Raju Sehgal Trust. The assessment year in question was 1979-80. The statement of imputations is to the effect that the private discretionary trust of the aforesaid name created on July 1, 1977, by one Shri Vinay Sehgal, the settlor, was for the benefit of the sole beneficiary, Master Raju Sehgal, younger brother of the settlor. The trustees were the parents of the settlor and the beneficiary, while the trust was created with corpus of only Rs. 1,000/ -. The trustees were given power to receive donations and gifts from relations, friends and so on. The assessee-trust filed the first return of income for the assessment year 1979-80 declaring their income nil. In the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1979-80, the trust claimed having received donations amounting to Rs. 16,52,053/-. The respondent completed the assessment on March 29, 1982 accepting the receipt of the aforesaid donations as genuine. A scrutiny of the record showed that 179 certificates were produced by the assessee from the alleged donors showing donations amounting to Rs 9,49,200/-. The alleged donors were mostly from Calcutta whereas the beneficiary, the trustees and the settlor were all from Delhi. Thus, the bulk of the donations were made by the parties in a different city far away. A good part of the funds of the trust was utilised by the trustees and other members of the Sehgal family, including the beneficiary. Details of such amounts have been given in the statement of imputations. Loans were also taken for substantial amounts from the trust by members of the Sehgal family for which no interest was charged. Curiously enough, none of the donors was ever assessed at an income exceeding Rs. 15,000/- till the assessment year 1982-83 and most of the donors have been assessed to incomes less than Rs. 1 0,000/ - each. All the donors deposited in their Bank account cash equal to the amount of the gift a day or two before the issue of the cheques towards making of the gift. None of the donors was related to the family of the beneficiary. The statement of imputations alleged that the trust was used apparently only as a device for converting the unaccounted income of the Sehgal family into an accounted income. The allegation is that the respondent without making any enquiry, in the assessment order held that the donations made to the trust were found to be genuine, rendering it difficult even to re-open the assessment of the trust for the said assessment year, without considering and determining the issues involved. As per imputations, the order enabled the Sehgal family