Criminal acquittal does not bar departmental dismissal on preponderance of probability standard for same misconduct.

ORDER

Rajnish Kumar Rai, Judicial Member

The applicant has preferred this O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:-

“a) An order do issue directing the respondent authorities, their men, agent and subordinates to reinstate the applicant in his post thereby setting aside the order of dismissal from engagement and confirmation of such order of dismissal by the appellate authority;

b) An order directing the respondent authorities, their men and subordinates to set aside the order of the appellate authority vide No.-PMG(SB)/SF(Vig)/A-07/07/2019 dated 14.07.2020 forthwith;

c) An order do issue upon the concerned respondent authorities to forthwith produce and/or cause to be produced entire records relating to the applicants case and production to be made, render conscientious justice after perusing the same;

d) An order do issue and/or pass such other or further order or orders as to this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.”

2. Facts of the case as narrated in the O.A. is as under:-

The applicant joined the postal department as Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Deliverer on 05.07.1995 at Dihipara Branch Post Office and thereafter he was posted at Paldanga Branch as temporary Postmaster. On 02.04.2011 the Inspector of Post, Bankura(N) Sub Division lodged a written complaint before the Sonamukhi Police Station alleging inter alia that during the period of 2007-2009 some fraudulent activities took place in the said post office and an amount of Rs.50,000/- was defrauded in some RPLI Accounts. Said complaint was treated as FIR and accordingly Sonamukhi Police Station started a police case No.28/2011 on 02.04.2011 against the applicant under Section 406/409 of the Indian Penal Code. On 25.04.2011 the applicant surrendered before the court and was taken to prison. The applicant was suspended from duty. On 31.05.2011 he was released on bail. After conclusion of the trial he was acquitted from all the charges levelled against him vide order dated 3^rd January, 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, 1^st Court, Bankura. In the meantime, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. After being acquitted from the charges, he submitted written representation to the authorities to withdraw his suspension from duty and allow him to join the post of Gramin Dak Sevak, but the Disciplinary Authority i.e. the Senior Superintendent of Post Office vide Memo dated 23.05.2019 imposed upon him the penalty of dismissal from service without granting him any opportunity of personal hearing. Challenging the said order, the applicant preferred an appeal and the Appellate Authority vide order dated 14.07.2020 affirmed the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority. Challenging the said order of the Appellate Authority dated 14.07.2020, the applicant has preferred the instant O.A. praying for the aforesaid reliefs.

3(a) The respondents have denied the claim of the applicant by filing written reply to the O.A. They have stated in their reply that on inspection, it was detected that the applicant was involved in misappropriation of Government money to the tune of Rs.50,000/-(approximately) for which a FIR was lodged. Learned Counsel for the respondents has submitted that on establishment of prima facie misappropriation of Government money and intentional removal of records from Branch Office, the applicant was placed under put off duty vide memo dated 01.04.2011 and disciplinary proceedings started against the applicant for violation of BO rules in accordance with Rule 10 of GDS (C&E) Rules 2011 by issuing charge sheet dated 04.04.2013.

(b) Meanwhile , the original a