The High Court confirmed that the Disciplinary Authority's decision to impose a penalty is sustainable if procedures are adhered to and the findings are not perverse, maintaining limited judicial review over disciplinary actions.

ORDER :

SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

1. By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:-

a) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s), specifically a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 19.01.2021 as contained in Memo No. CCL/VIG/RDA-08/19/20-21/1841, issued by the respondent no.4 whereby and whereunder major penalty of “Reduction of one stage lower for a period of one year in time scale starting from 01.01.2021 without cumulative effect” has been imposed upon the petitioner.

b) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s), specifically a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the appellate order dated 10.05.2021 as contained in Memo No. CIL/ GM/(P)/Appeal /21/708/AA/ 303, issued by the respondent no.1, wherein the appellate authority has been pleased to uphold the penalty of “Reduction of one stage lower for a period of one year in time Scale starting from 01.01.2021 without cumulative effect” imposed by the CMD, CCL /DA, vide order no. CCL /VIL/RDA-68/19 /20-21/1841, dated 19.01.2021.

c) During the pendency of the case, be further pleased to direct the respondents to keep one seat vacant for his promotion from E-6 to E-7, in case this writ petitioner is allowed and accordingly grant him Promotion with effect from the date on which the other persons who had cleared the Departmental Promotion Committee held from 03.09.2019 to 09.09.2019, were granted promotion and in which the petitioner was also found eligible for promotion.

2. The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Executive Trainee on 01.11.1991 and is currently serving as a Senior Manager (Material Management) at Darbhanga House, Ranchi. In 2018, while posted at Central Coalfields Limited (CCL), Hazaribag, a vigilance investigation was initiated in relation to 65 files for the period between January 2016 to August 2019. During this period, the petitioner was posted at Hazaribag area. A Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meeting was held between 03.09.2019 to 09.09.2019 for promoting employees from E-6 to E-7 grade. The petitioner was found eligible for promotion. However, just one day before the promotion list was released, a charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on 25.09.2019, even though his name was reflected in the seniority list. The petitioner submitted his reply to the charge sheet on 16.10.2019, but the same was not accepted by the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority, after a proper inquiry, issued a memo on 19.01.2021, imposing penalty on the petitioner by reducing his pay by one stage for one year. The petitioner preferred a departmental appeal before the Respondent No. 2, but his appeal was rejected on 10.05.2021, and the penalty was upheld.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that an internal inquiry was held against the petitioner and none of the charges against the petitioner were proved. He further contended that the Disciplinary Authority disagreed with this report and without giving any clear reasons imposed penalty reducing the petitioner’s salary by one stage for one year which led to the petition