Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 5098
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Umesh Gajankush, J, Shri Krishna, A
Shri Praveen Maroti Pal – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India – Respondent
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.571 OF 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri M.G.Burde
For the Respondents: Shri Bhaskar D. Pandit
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, ensuring the accused has a fair opportunity to defend themselves, including access to evidence.
Headnote:(A) CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 - Rule 16 - Disciplinary proceedings - The applicant challenged the penalty of recovery for negligence leading to damage of Government property - The Tribunal found that there was a lack of due process and violation of principles of natural justice in the disciplinary proceedings. (Paras 2, 6, 9)
(B) Principles of Natural Justice - It is imperative that a delinquent employee is provided a reasonable opportunity to defend themselves during disciplinary proceedings, including access to evidence against them. (Paras 2, 9)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was penalized for alleged negligence in driving a Government vehicle resulting in damage. He contended that due process was not followed during the inquiry, and the charges were based on insufficient evidence. (Paras 2, 5)
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found that the disciplinary authority did not provide the applicant with a proper hearing or access to the Board of Enquiry report, violating principles of natural justice. (Paras 9, 10)
Issues: The main issues were whether the disciplinary proceedings adhered to due process and whether the applicant was afforded a fair opportunity to present his case. (Paras 6, 10)
Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal ruled that the lack of a fair hearing and failure to provide the applicant with pertinent evidence rendered the disciplinary actions unsustainable and violated natural justice principles. (Paras 9, 10)
Result: The OA is allowed, and the impugned orders are set aside.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural lapses in disciplinary inquiry. (Para 2) |
| 2. natural justice principles violated. (Para 4 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. impugned orders set aside. (Para 10) |
| 4. order allowing the application. (Para 11 , 12) |
ORDER
Per : Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)
The applicant before this Tribunal is challenging the impugned punishment order dated 19.11.2019 issued by the respondent No.3, for imposing of the penalty of “recovery of pecuniary loss caused to the Government by negligence” for the charges framed under Rule 16 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and the impugned appellate order dated 13.07.2020 issued by the respondent No.2, by upholding the order of penalty.
2. Brief facts of the case are that at the relevant point of time, the applicant was working on the post of C.M.D. (Grade I) M.T. with the respondents and in respect of alleged incident on 07.03.2018, the charge memo dated 10.01.2019 was issued to the applicant under Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 by leveling the following charges :
“Statement of imputation of Gross Misconduct or mis-behaviour on which action is proposed to be taken under Rule-16 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 against Shri P.M. Pal. CMD (Gr-l), Per. No. 003646/MT, Ordnance Factory, Chanda.
It has been reported that on 07.03.2018, the said Shri P.M. Pal, CMD (Gr-I), Per. No. 003646/MT, Ordnance Factory, Chanda was detailed as driver for on duty to O.F. Ambajhari, Nagpur along with Shri Arun B. Badole, Ch'man/U-III and Shri Vishal S. Narad, DBW/U-III through Factory Vehicle Tata Xenon No. MH-34/AV-2634.
02. It has been also reported that after returning on same day at around 07.00 PM, the vehicle kept beside Drawing Office in front of Petrol Pump. On 08.03.2018 in the morning hours the said vehicle was found in the damaged conditions (Right Side head light broken and portion near headlight damaged). The loss of the said damages to the Tata Xenon No. MH-34-AV-2634 has been assessed near about Rs. 36,892/-. The above damages has occurred due to rash and negligent driving.
03. It has been further reported that during journey between O.F. Chanda/Nagpur and Nagpur/ O.F. Chanda, the factory vehicle at high speed might have collided with another vehicle having high ground Chasses or the factory vehicle in high speed might have collided with any structure. It has been concluded that the safety of the Govt. Vehicle is on the Driver who rode the vehicle. Thus fact and circumstances fix on the said Shri P.M. Pal, CMD (Gr-I) responsible for damage of Govt. vehicle.
04. The above acts on the part of the said Shri P.M. Pal, CMD (Gr-I). Per. No. 003646/MT, Ordnance Factory, Chanda is construed as Gross Misconduct viz. rashness and negligence in driving causing damage to the tune of Rs. 36,892/- to Govt. property - lack of devotion to duty and an act unbecoming of a Govt. Servant contravening Rule 3 (1) (ii) & (II) of CCS (Conduct), Rules, 1964.”
2(a). Thereafter, the applicant has submitted a detailed reply dated 21.09.2019 to the Senior General Manager, Ordnance Factory, Chanda, District Chandrapur denying all the charges.
2(b). That prior to aforesaid in respect of alleged negligence / careless driving, the respondents got investigated the matter in respect of damaged vehicle and based upon the statement recorded, report dated 06.04.2018 was submitted by the Senior Security Officer. Thereafter, the Board of Enquiry was conducted on 04.12.2018 in which it was concluded that during forward or return journey between Nagpur – O.F. Chanda and the vehicle at high speed might have collided with another vehicle having high ground Chasses or the factory vehicle in high speed might have collided with any structure. It was further concluded that driver may be responsible for the damage and the passengers are trying to save the driver by giving false statements. Based upon the aforesaid Board of Enquiry report, charge memo dated 10.01.2019 was issued.
2(c). Thereafter, without conducting a detailed enquiry and without considering the reply dated 29.01
