JUDGMENT

Vipin Sanghi, J.(Oral)

C.M. No. 33335/2019

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C.) No. 8043/2019

1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 10.09.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, (the Tribunal) in O.A. No. 419/2013. The Tribunal has rejected the said Original Application preferred by the petitioner, wherein he had assailed the inquiry proceedings and the consequent punishment order of dismissal from service inflicted upon him. The charge sheet issued to the petitioner contained the following charge:

"ARTICLE I

That Shri Rati Pal Saroj, while functioning as section officer/Under Secretary in the Union Public Service Commission, New Delhi during the period 1985-86, with the help of other officials of the Union Public Service Commission, substituted fresh written answer sheets of General Studies Papers I & II, answer books of History Paper II and Philosophy Papers I & II for the Civil Services (Main) Examination held in 1985 and obtained very high marks with the result that he was selected and delivered appointment letter dated 31.7.1986 by the Central Government for the post in the Indian Administrative Service Group `A' service for which he could not otherwise have been selected.

Shri Rati Pal Saroj by his above acts exhibited lack of integrity and conduct unbecoming of a Government Servant, thereby violating Rule 3 of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964."

2. He has been found guilty of the said charge and, accordingly, dismissed from service.

3. The first submission of Mr. Raju is that the memorandum of charge had not been approved by the competent authority, namely the Prime Minister of India before its issuance. In this regard, he places reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in B.V. Gopinath & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., (2014) 1 SCC 351. The Tribunal has dealt with this submission of the petitioner from paragraph 18 onwards of the impugned order. The Tribunal takes note of the fact that a comprehensive note was submitted for the approval of the Prime Minister. Paragraph 10 and 11 of the note prepared by the Desk Officer on 28.09.1989 mention the drafts of the sanction order for prosecution of the petitioner, and the charge sheet for initiation of departmental proceedings, and states that they are based on facts mentioned in the SP's report and that they appear to be in order. Paras 10 and 11 of the said note read as follows:

"10. The drafts of the sanction order for prosecution of Shri Rati Pal Saroj and chargesheet for initiating departmental proceedings against him are based on the facts mentioned in the SP's report and appear to be in order.

11. The case may be submitted to the Prime Minister through MOS(PP) for soliciting his approval to the prosecution as well as initiation of major penalty proceedings against Shri Saroj. Approval of the Prime Minister is also solicited for appointment of Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer in case Shri Saroj denies the charges against him."

4. The Tribunal also takes note of the fact that the said note states in final paragraph 10, as follows:

"10. Orders of Prime Minister as Minister-in-Charge of the Department is solicited for the following:

(1) To initiate major penalty proceedings against Shri Ratipal Saroj under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on the following charge:

(a) That while functioning as Under Secretary in the Union Public Service Commission, New Delhi during the period 1985-86, with the help of other officials of UPSC substituted three answer sheets of General Studies Papers I & II, answer papers History Paper I & II and Philosophy Papers I & II for the Civil Services (Main) Examination held in 1985 and obtained very high marks with the result that he was selected and delivered appointment letter dated 31.7.86 by the Central Government to the Indian Administrative Service, for wh