The punishment inflicted upon the petitioner was not disproportionate to the established misconduct.

1. The petitioner, who was working on the post of an Executive Engineer (Civil) with the Border Road Development Board and was posted as the Officer Commanding at 68 RCC in the year 1994, was issued a Memorandum of Charge dated 20th March, 1998, in respect of some mismatch of funds collected as offerings in the month of November, 1994, in respect of two temples in the area, inasmuch as against a sum of Rs.51,816.25 collected as offerings, only a sum of Rs.37,855 was reflected in the Regimental Cash Account Book.

2. The Memorandum of Charge dated 20th March, 1998 had enclosed therewith three Articles of Charge. However, we propose to confine ourselves to Article-I only, as the remaining two charges were not proved in the course of the departmental inquiry held against the petitioner.

3. Article-I of the Statement of Articles of Charge is reproduced herein below for ready reference:-

“ ARTICLE-I

That the said Shri L.N. Tiku, EE (C) [now SE(C) SG] while functioning as Officer Commanding, 68 Road Construction Coy during Dec. 94 was required to account for a sum of Rs.51,816.25 in the Regimental Cash Accounts Book of unit on account of Offerings for the month of Nov. 94 in respect of Rs.37,855/- only was taken on charge by Shri K. Sadanandan, 2nd in Command of said unit, which was countersigned ‘as correct by Shri L.N.Tiku, EE (C) [now SE(C) SG]. Thus Shri L.N. Tiku EE (C) [now SE(C) SG] while holding a Supervisory post failed to ensure proper accounting and also failed to maintain absolute devotion to duty in terms of Rule 3(1) (ii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.”

4. The petitioner was called upon to submit a reply to the aforesaid Memorandum of Charge dated 20th March, 1998. A reply dated 27th April, 1998 was submitted by him wherein he had responded to the charge levelled against him in respect of Article-I, in the following manner:-

“Annexure I

(a) Article I of Annexure I. As per Charter of duties of Second-in Command of the RCC, all the offerings collected in respect of Tiranda Mandir and Srimati Dhang Mandir were being accounted for by AE (C) K Sadanandan through a Board of Officers which was detailed by him after consultation with OC unit. The undersigned was working as OC unit and to have smooth functioning of the unit, it is imperative to have the full and complete trust on the Second-in-Command of the unit. I was having this trust on Shri K Sadanandan, AE (C) and there was no untoward incident in the past. However, following procedure was followed for collection of offerings/ donations at the Tiranda and Srimati Dhang Mandirs:-

All the offerings used to be collected in sealed boxes which were further collected by Board of Officers from the above said Mandirs and brought to HQ RCC location. These boxed are opened in the presence of BOO and subsequently money is counted and deposited with the Second-in-Command RCC. He caters the amount, thus collected, in appropriate account and then deposits it in the Bank. It is only the Board Proceedings which OC RCC is used to sign on the advise of Second-in-Command, RCC, the account holder of all the accounts maintained at RCC level.

I have no knowledge about posting of less amount in the cash box than what was collected through the Board of Officers for the month of Nov 94. In case there has been some concealment of the amount from the collection of Mandir offerings through Board of officers, the same was not brought to my notice. At that time, I had never thought of that there could be any variation between the posted amount and the amount actually collected by BOO since it had never happened previously and I had full faith in my 2IC Shri K Sadanandan, who was sincere and meticulous in his job. I do not recollect the happening then and if it had happened, it is purely the breach of faith and Shri K Sadanandan seems to have taken full advantage of it.”

5. It is the case of the respondents that going by the charter of duties referred to by the petitioner in his reply to the Memorandum and