Point of Law: Article 351-A of CSR empowers the Governor to institute or continue inquiry after retirement.

JUDGMENT :

SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

1. A charge-sheet dated 09.11.2006 was served to petitioner, working as a Consolidation Officer, Agra, contains following two charges:

^^vkjksi la[;k&1

vkius xzke ekS/kk tuin Q:Z[kkckn ds okn la[;k 592 ¼/kkjk 0 v½ esa ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 28-02-2003 }kjk xzke ekS/kk ds xkVk la[;k 1285@0&60@1420@7&00 ls xzke dk uke [kkfjt djds vukj flag iq= ij'kqjke dk uke ntZ fd;kA rnksijkUr fu;r 109 ds vUrxZr okn la[;k 198 rkjh[k QSlyk 18-10-2003 esa ikfjr vkns'kkuqlkj mDr vkns'k dk veynjken djk fn;kA ftlls xzke lHkk lEifRr dks viw.khZ; {kfr o Jh vukj flag iq= ij'kqjke dks vuqfpr ykHk igaqpk] ftlds fy;s vki nks"kh gS rFkk bl d`R; ls vkidh lR;fu"Bk lafnX/k gksrh gSA

vkjksi la[;k&2

xzke fcढ-Sy ds okn la[;k 1405 vUrxZr /kkjk 9d rkŒQSŒ 2-4-1998 }kjk xzke lHkk ds xkVk la[;k 374@070] 424@036] 426@0&67 dqy 173 ,dM+ ls uke [kkfjt djds Jh nsosUæ dqekj feJk] pdcUnh vf/kdkjh }kjk Jh Qs:flag iq= tkSgjh uke ntZ djus dk vfu;fer vkns'k ikfjr fd;k FkkA vkius okn la[;k 191 vUrxZr /kkjk 109 esa ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 28-10-1993 }kjk veynjken djk fn;kA ftlls xzke lHkk dks viw.khZ; {kfr gqbZ rFkk O;fDr fo'ks"k dks vuqfpr ykHk igaqpkA ftlds fy;s vki nks"kh gSA rFkk bl d`R; ls vkidh lR;fu"Bk lafnX/k gksrh gSA**

2. The petitioner filed applications dated 04.12.2006 and 13.02.2007 demanding the documents, contending that his signatures on the order referred in the charge sheet were forged and he had not put his signatures. He also seeks permission to examine the documents. However, neither documents were provided nor any oral evidence was recorded during inquiry. The Inquiry Officer conducted inquiry and submitted its report dated 09.08.2007 whereby the above referred both charges were found proved against petitioner.

3. Sri Kshitij Shailendra, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that Inquiry Officer has acted as an appellate authority and conducted inquiry as he was sitting in appeal against the orders passed by petitioner. The original records were not brought on record before Inquiry Officer and he erroneously came to conclusion that petitioner while passing certain orders as Consolidation Officer had committed procedure error which led to loss of revenue to Gaon Sabha concerned. Thereafter a copy of inquiry report was submitted to petitioner and a show-cause notice dated 09.10.2007 was issued. Petitioner submitted reply to the show cause notice and again contended that orders were not passed by him and signatures were forged by a gang which was operating at the relevant time. It was also contended that there was no mala-fide intention to pass such orders. The orders were passed on the basis of earlier orders and were in nature of execution.

4. Meanwhile, petitioner retired on 30.04.2008 after attaining age of superannuation. Thereafter a fresh show cause notice was issued on 09.07.2008 with proposed punishment of 50% deduction from pension as well as 50% deduction from gratuity. Petitioner replied the said show cause notice on 29.07.2008 again reiterating earlier stand that the orders passed by petitioner were in the nature of execution of earlier orders and that relevant documents were not shown to petitioner as well as the entire inquiry was vitiated as it was conducted without complying the principle of nature justice. The Commissioner (Consolidation) granted permission under Article 351-A of Civil Service Regulations (hereinafter referred to as “CSR”) to continue inquiry after retirement of petitioner and finally the Chief Secretary under the orders of Governor passed impugned order dated 03.08.2012 whereby petitioner was awarded punishment of 10% permanent deduction in pension and 50% deduction each from pension as well as gratuity.

5. Sri Kshitij Shailendra, learned counsel for petitioner, further submitted that in case any party was aggrieved by the orders passed by petitioner, it would have challenged the same before Appellate Forum, however, none of the party has approached the Appellate Forum, therefore, the concerned pa