Reopening closed disciplinary case for recovery without fresh inquiry violates double jeopardy under Art.20(2) and natural justice.

ORDER

PER HON’BLE MRS. SHALINI MISRA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

The applicant has filed this OA seeking the following relief:

“To call for the records pertaining to order in memo No.I/DA/NB/III/Digs, dated 16/24-02-2021, and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the rules prescribed and in violation of the principles of natural justice and the Articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and set aside and quash the same with consequential direction to the respondents to refund the amount already recovered from the pay of the applicant and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially appointed as Postman in Nellore Division on 02.05.1994. He was later promoted to the cadre of Postal Assistant w.e.f. 03.07.2006. He was granted financial upgradation under MACP Scheme in Postal Assistant cadre on 26.05.2004.

3. The 3^rd respondent issued charge sheet under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, vide Memo No.L/DA/NB, dated 28.12.2010, to the applicant levelling the following article of charge:

Article-I

Sri N.Bujjaiah, SPM, Gandavaram SO, while working as Offg. SPM, Vidavalur SO during the period from 23.06.07 to 16.07.07, has allowed discharge of the following KVP certificate without proper identification of the investor and without comparing the signature of the investor with that available on the application form for purchase thereby causing fraudulent encashment of the said KVPs, by a person other than the investor, to the tune of Rs.65,540/- (Rs. Sixty five thousand five hundred and forty only). Further, on 29.06.07, two KVPs bearing Nos.09CD 56315 and 563116 were discharged for an amount of Rs.26,216/- allowing payment of cash instead of cheque in violation of DG instructions contained in ITR No.5-20/UP-06/2000-Inv dated 28/29.08.01.

It is, therefore, alleged that the said Sri N.Bujjaiah had contravened the provisions contained under Rule 22 of POSB Manual Volume II, DG instructions in letr No.50-20/UP-06/2000-Inv, dated 28/29.08.01, and thereby failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty as required of him under Rule 3 (1) (i) and Rule 3(1)(ii) of CCS (Conduct) rules, 1964.”

4. On denying the charges, the Disciplinary Authority (Respondent No.3) appointed the Inquiry Officer and the Presenting Officer to enquire into the charges levelled against the applicant, vide memo No.L/DA/NB, dated 03.02.2021. The Inquiry Officer conducted the inquiry. On completion of the inquiry, the Inquiry Officer arranged to supply a copy of the brief of the Presenting Officer dated 27.07.2012. The applicant submitted his reply brief dated 19.08.2012, disproving the charges on the basis of evidence. The inquiry Officer, after considering the submissions made by the applicant both oral and documentary evidence on record, submitted his report dated 15.10.2012 to the Disciplinary Authority holding the charges as not proved and made observation that the prosecution has not produced sufficient evidence to hold article of charge as proved beyond reasonable doubt.

5. The Disciplinary Authority supplied the copy of the Inquiry Officer‟s Report dated 15.10.2012 to the applicant and directed to submit his representation against the report within 15 days. The applicant submitted his written statement of defence dated 11.12.2012. The ad hoc Disciplinary Authority, after considering/evaluating the evidence on record judiciously and considering the submissions made by