JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Ms. Ruth Lalruatfeli, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

2. The facts of the case in brief is that the petitioner was appointed as Middle School Teacher on 10.06.1994 and was posted at Champhai Bethel Middle School. Due to her proficiency in computer and typing, she was attached to the office of Sub-Divisional Education Officer (North) on 25.02.2001 and thereafter, she was attached to the office of the Sub-Divisional Education Officer, Darlawn (SDEO, Darlawn) in the month of November, 2008. The SDEO Darlawn made work distribution vide Office Order dated 15.10.2014 to be effective immediately and the petitioner was allotted the file of Recurring Grants-in-Aid for Non-Govt. Middle Schools, Non-Recurring Grants of All Schools, U.C & APR’s of all kinds of GIA etc, Pay & Allowances of Hindi Teacher, Revenue Receipt, Pay & Allowances of Est., Pay & Allowances of Govt. M/S, Pay & Allowances of Govt. P/S, Pay and Allowances of H/T and the Pay roll Scheme. However, as the office of the SDEO Darlawn was a small establishment, the petitioner mainly functioned as a Computer Operator.

3. The petitioner on account of certain allegation made against her and pending drawal of the departmental proceeding was placed under suspension on 27.07.2016. The allegation made against her was that she was involved in the alleged misappropriation and embezzlement of Government money by fraudulently drawing of pay and arrears of teachers. The order of suspension was revoked by an Order dated 24.03.2017 w.e.f. 25.10.2016 and the petitioner joined her service. However, she was again suspended on 06.04.2017 on the apprehension that her presence may prejudice the ongoing special audit. Thereafter, her suspension was revoked again on 19.07.2017 during the ongoing departmental enquiry.

4. The respondent No. 1 issued a memorandum of charge dated 03.05.2017 against the petitioner proposing to hold an enquiry against her for violation of Rule 3(i)(ii)(iii) and Rule 3-C of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964, Rule 21 of GFR and Rule 13(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act).Against the memorandum of charge, the petitioner submitted her written statement of defence but the authority decided to continue with the departmental proceeding. During the proceeding, two State witnesses were examined and thereafter, the Enquiring Authority upon completing the enquiry submitted the enquiry report to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Mizoram, School Education on 16.03.2018 by concluding that the charge against the petitioner was proved. A copy of the enquiry report was given to the petitioner on 11.04.2018, asking her to submit a written representation if any, against the enquiry report within 15 days of the receipt of the same. The petitioner submitted her written representation on 24.04.2018, stating that whatever steps she had taken was as per the instruction of the Cashier. She had no knowledge of whether the excess drawal had been made or not and how it was utilized and also who had pocketed the same. She also stated that she had submitted her bank account statement to the Enquiry Officer to show that none of the personal bills of the teachers concerned were credited to her bank account. Therefore, the allegation made against her was not true and if there was any excess drawal, it was only due to her compliance to the instruction given by the higher authorities. Thereafter, the petitioner was imposed with a major penalty of dismissal from service with immediate effect vide Order dated 13.09.2019. Being aggrieved with the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Rule 24 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 before the Chief Secretary. However, the petitioner’s appeal was rejected by the said authority vide Order dated 24.11.2021 and that is how the petitioner is before this Court.

5. Ms. Ruth Lalruatfeli, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that