2015 Supreme(Del) 467
High Court of Delhi
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG & PRATIBHA RANI, JJ.
M.L. Bhuyan - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Others - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 2838 of 2012
Decided on: 23-03-2015
For the Petitioner:Madhusmita Bora, Bijay Pradhan, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Amit Mahajan, CGSC for UOI.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the imposition of a penalty under Rule 9 of the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 is justified when there is evidence of grave misconduct and pecuniary loss caused to the government.
Headnote:
Gross Misconduct - Pension Reduction - CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964, GFR, CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 - The court discussed the charges of gross misconduct against the petitioner under Articles I-V of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964, and the imposition of a penalty of reduction of pension by 25% for a period of five years under Rule 9 of the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972. The court analyzed the evidence, the delay in initiating the disciplinary proceedings, and the legal provisions governing the imposition of the penalty.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a retired doctor from Sashastra Seema Bal, was charged with gross misconduct for irregularities in the purchase of medicines in 1999-2000. The inquiry report found the petitioner guilty and imposed a penalty of reducing his pension by 25% for five years.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the charges of gross misconduct were supported by evidence and that the penalty of reducing the pension was justified under Rule 9 of the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972.
Issues: Delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings, imposition of penalty under Rule 9 of CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in initiating the proceedings did not cause prejudice to the petitioner, and the penalty of reducing the pension was justified based on the grave misconduct and pecuniary loss caused to the government.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the penalty of reducing the petitioner's pension by 25% for five years was upheld.
Pratibha Rani, J.
1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner lays a challenge to the order dated October 11, 2011 imposing a penalty of reduction of his pension by 25% for a period of five years for the alleged act of gross misconduct in the year 1999-2000 in purchase of medicines.
2. The factual matrix concerning the writ petition is that the petitioner joined Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) as a Doctor in the year 1974. On attaining the age of superannuation he retired as DIG (Medical) on May 31, 2009. The petitioner was posted as CMO, Divisional HQ, Itanagar, A.P. in the year 1999-2000. During his tenure as CMO, under Border Area Development Programme (BADB Scheme) medicines worth Rs. 10 lacs were purchased. Certain irregularities in the purchase of medicines were revealed in the 10th PV (physical verification) Report by DACS. Audit objection was raised by 10th PV party triggering a communication dated January 8, 2002 to DO AP SSB, Itanagar asking the supplier to refund the excess cost above MRP charged by him. The supplier refunded an amount of Rs. 88,797/- being charged higher than the MRP against the supply of medicines to AO Ziro. The petitioner alleged that after an inordinate and unexplained delay of about ten years, a inquiry was initiated against the petitioner, Dr. (Mrs.) N. Bhuyan, Commandant (Medical), Dr. S.M. Singh, Assistant Surgeon (Veterinary), Shri D.K. Thungon, Sub Area Organiser and Shri Dalbir Gogoi, Senior Field Assistant (Medic). A charge memo was issued to the petitioner for initiating the inquiry under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 which was duly replied by the petitioner on April 15, 2008. The petitioner was charged as under for his alleged act of gross misconduct:-
“(1) Statement of Article of Charges Framed Against Dr. M.L. Bhuvan, the then CMO, Divisional Hqrs, Itanagar, AP Division Now DIG (Medical), SSB (Retired)
ARTICLE-I
That the said Dr. M.L. Bhuyan, the then CMO (now DIG (Medical) while functioning as I/C MI Room restored to local purchase of Medicines amounting Rs.10 lakh during the year 1999-2000, violating the established laid down procedures, thereby committing misconduct and an act most unbecoming of a Government servant of his rank and status hereby violating the provision of Rule 3 Sub Rule (1) Clause (ii) & (iii) of the CCS(Conduct) Rules, 1964.
ARTICLE-II
That the said Dr. M.L.Bhuyan, during the period 1999-2000 had not adopted the open tender system required for processing of purchases which are exceeding Rs. 2 lakh and instead invited quotations from local firms which is contrary to para 28 Annexure below Rule 102(1) of GFR thereby violating the established laid down procedure and committing misconduct and an act most unbecoming of a Government servant of his rank and status, hereby violating the provision of Rule 3 Sub-Rule (1) Clause (ii) & (iii) of the CCS (Conduct) Rule, 1964.
ARTICLE-III
That the said Dr. M.L. Bhuyan, while processing the procurement of medicines, being the presiding officer for opening of quotations under Border Area Development Programme during 1999-2000 at the erstwhile Divisional Hqrs, Itanagar AP Division had failed to observe that costs of medicines quoted by M/s Orient Pharmacy were on higher side than the MRP printed on the medicines. He also changed the medicines approved, on his own, without seeking approval of the Competent Authority which shows his negligence and lack of devotion to duty on the part of a responsible officer of his status and rank thereby committing misconduct and an act most unbecoming of a Government servant of his rank and status thereby violating the provision of Rule 3 Sub Rule (1) Clause (ii) & (iii) of the CCS (Conduct) Rule, 1964.
ARTICLE-IV
That the said Dr. M.L. Bhuyan while processing the procurement of medicines signed on a false certificate recorded by Shri D. Gogoi, SFA (Medic) on the bill, thereby exhibiting gross negligence and supervision and hence committed misconduct and act most unbecoming of a Government