CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.021/00466/2023 th HYDERABAD, this the 15 day of April, 2024 CORAM:

HON’BLE DR. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Mr. Ravi Dharavath, Sc ‘C’

S/o. Bhadru, age: 33 years ASL, Defence Research & Development Organisation Ministry of Defence PO Kanchanbagh Hyderabad – 500058. …..Applicant (By Advocate Sri K.Sudhakar Reddy)

Vs.

Union of India Rep. by its Director of Personnel Government of India Ministry of Defence Defence Research & Development Organisation HQ, Directorate of Personnel ‘A’ Block, DRDO Bhavan New Delhi – 110011. ….Respondent (By Advocate Sri B.Siva Sankar, Senior Panel Counsel for Central Government)

*****

ORAL ORDER PER: HON’BLE DR. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1. By this Original Application, the applicant is seeking the following reliefs:-

“To call for the records and quash and set aside the impugned order No: DOP/08/9307/M/01 dated: 22 May 2023 issued by the respondent imposing the penalty of ‘Censure’ on the applicant as illegal, arbitrary and also violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India.”

2. The facts of the case in a nutshell are as under:

The applicant is presently working as Scientist ‘C’ in the office of ASL, Defence Research & Development Organisation, Ministry of Defence, PO Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad (2^nd respondent) and he belongs to ST community. While so he was arrested by police on 29.11.2019 and kept under detention on the basis of a complaint lodged against him and an FIR was registered basing on the same under Section 313, 376, 323, 294(b) IPC and Sec 4 of DP Act. A charge sheet was also filed in the criminal case on 21.01.2020. On the basis of the charge sheet dated 21.01.2020 filed in the criminal Court, the respondent herein initiated a departmental proceeding against the applicant vide charge memo dated 16.09.2020 for inquiry under Rule 14 of the CCS(CCA) Rules 1965 by relying on the charge sheet filed in the criminal court and framed article of charges for refusing to marry the complainant and thereby unbecoming of a Govt Servant thus violation of Rule 3 (1) (iii) & (vi) CCS and 3(1) (xi) Conduct Rules 1964 and also violation of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961. Then applicant submitted his written statement of defence vide letter dated 10.10.2020 wherein he denied all the charges. The alleged criminal case is not at all related to the office duties of the applicant. It is a false complaint made against the applicant at the behest of the rivals in the native village and the applicant is falsely implicated in a criminal case. Departmental proceedings are not based on the work related to his job in the office nor it relates to any misappropriation of funds and any insubordination. Respondent herein totally relied upon the charge sheet filed in the criminal Court as the evidence to prove the charges. The allegations in the complaint are related to Section 313, 376, 323, 294 (b) IPC and Sec 4 of DP Act but whereas the department initiated the disciplinary proceedings against the applicant under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965 for violation of Rule 3 of CCS(Conduct) Rules 1964. In fact there is no complaint submitted to the department against the applicant making any of the allegations. Instead of waiting for the outcome of the criminal case, the respondent initiated departmental proceeding on the basis of the charge sheet filed in the criminal court and shown the same as listed document to prove the charges. Under Rule 19 of CCS Rules, a special procedure is laid down which says if a government employee is convicted in the criminal court after trial in the court of law, the disciplinary authority can take a decision after going through the judgment. Without waiting for the outcome of the criminal case, respondent in haste initiated disciplinary proceedings under CCS(Conduct) Rules relying on the charge sheet filed in the criminal court. The applicant was