Disciplinary actions require proof on the preponderance of probabilities; mere recovery of currency notes does not establish misconduct without evidence of demand or acceptance.

JUDGMENT

V. Kameswar Rao, J. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash and/or set aside the Impugned Order dated 03.11.2020 by which the appeal of the petitioner has been rejected by the Board of Directors and the order dated 16 July 2020 passed by the Managing Director has been confirmed;

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to reverse and set aside and quash the Penalty Order dated 16 July 2020 passed by the Managing Director of the Respondent removing the Petitioner from service;

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondent to reinstate the Petitioner back in service;

(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus to treat the intermittent period of the petitioner as that spent on duty and direct the Respondent to pay the complete pay and allowances of the said period to the petitioner:

(v) Consequent to the dismissal order dated 16 July 2020 and the appellate order dated 03.11.2020 being set aside, pass orders for all consequential benefits, in all respect, in favour of the petitioner and against the Respondent;

(vi) Pass any other or further orders as may be deemed to be just and proper in the circumstances of the present case."

2. It is a case wherein the petitioner/Charged Officer (`CO', for short) was the Area Manager of the respondent's District Office at Moga, Punjab. The respondent is an organization created and run by the Government of India. It is a statutory body under the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Government of India, formed by the enactment of the Food Corporation Act, 1964.

3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition against the Order dated November 03, 2020, passed by the Board of Directors of the respondent by which the respondent rejected the appeal filed against the Order dated July 16, 2020, passed by the Disciplinary Authority (`DA', for short).

4. Order dated November 03, 2020, confirms the Order of penalty of `Removal from Service' dated July 16, 2020, passed under Regulation 58 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1971 by the DA of the Food Corporation of India (`FCI', for short).

5. It is contended by Ms. Rashmi Gogoi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the Impugned Order dated November 03, 2020, which affirms the earlier order dated July 16, 2020, is without reliable evidence which could connect the petitioner with the Government Currency (`GC', for short) notes recovered from the petitioner's office and therefore the Impugned Orders amounts to a gross miscarriage of justice. It is further contended by her that the respondent has erred in passing the impugned orders as the order of removal from service as well as the appellate order, are based on no evidence or proof, and at best is a case of suspicion, which cannot entail the penalty of removal.

6. Brief factual background that led to the filing of the present writ petition is that on March 19, 2018, a search was conducted at the office of the petitioner by the Central Bureau of Investigation (`CBI', for short) based on a complaint filed by Rohit Mittal for purposes of investigation. According to the aforementioned investigation conducted at the office chamber of the petitioner, GC notes were obtained from the flush tank of the toilet and from the right-side drawer of the table amounting to a sum of Rs.2,52,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Fifty-Two Thousand Only).