Disciplinary actions must consider mitigating factors and cannot impose disproportionate punishments without sufficient justification.

Order :

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

2. Heard Mr. Sidharth Sankar Mohapatra, learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the Union of India and Mr. Nirmal Ranjan Routray, learned counsel for the opposite party.

3. This writ petition has been filed by the Union of India and others challenging the order dated 10.10.2023 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No.94 of 2015 under Annexure-3.

4. The opposite party Rakesh Kumar Maurya filed the aforesaid Original Application with the following prayers:-

"(i) the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the order dated 22.06.2012 under Annexure A-26, order dated 28.09.2012 under Annexure A-31, order dated 29.08.2013 under Annexure A-33 and order dated 05.12.2014 under Annexure A-35 and enquiry report dated 01.05.2012 under Annexure-A/23 after declaring those as illegal, unreasonable and arbitrary;

(ii) and direct the Respondents to reinstate the applicant in service with effect from 22.06.2012 with all consequential benefits by treating the intervening period as a period spent on duty;

(iii) and be further pleased to award exemplary costs in favour of the applicant who has been forced to approach the Hon’ble Tribunal;

(iv) and pass any other order(s)/ direction(s) as deemed fit and proper in the bonafide interest of justice.”

5. Notice was issued to the petitioners and they filed the counter affidavit and the opposite party filed the rejoinder affidavit also.

6. The learned Tribunal, after considering the pleadings and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, has been pleased to hold as follows:-

“14. In view of the law stated above, this Tribunal is not convinced to quash the charge memo, the DA and the AA order. However, on examination of the facts and law discussed above, this Tribunal is convinced that gross injustice was caused to the applicant in the decision making process of the matter; especially by the Revisional Authority vide order dated 29.08.2013 (A/33) in compliance of the order of the RRT dated 03.06.2013 (A/37). This Tribunal is also convinced/felt that the punishment of compulsory retirement is shockingly disproportionate/ harsh to the charges levelled against the applicant. Hence, the order of the Revisional Authority dated 29.08.2013 (A/33) and the letter dated 05.12.2014 (A/35) are hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the Revisional Authority/General Manager, ECoR, BBSR for suitable modification of the punishment, other than dismissal/removal/compulsory retirement and issuance of consequential order to the above effect. While considering and passing the consequential order as directed above, authority concerned shall also deal with the matter relating to treating the period and payment of service and financial benefits from the date of dismissal till fresh order is issued. Since considerable long time has been lapsed in the meanwhile, to avoid further delay, the concerned authority is directed to complete the entire drill within a period of 45 (forty five) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.(cid:0)·

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the order of the learned Tribunal is not sustainable in the eyes of law because of the limited scope of interference in disciplinary proceedings and punishment imposed by the Competent Authority. He has relied upon the decision in the case of State Bank of Patiala -Vrs.- S.K. Sharma and others reported in 1966 SCC (L&S) 739, which held that the procedural provisions have been violated in course of proceeding and no complain is made with regard to any prejudice caused to the delinquent, the Court should not interfere with the decision of the authority exercising judicial review power. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, there is no violation of principles of natural justice or any procedure lapses have been alleged by the opposite party causing