CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH OA 260/00541 of 2019 RCOesReArvMe:d on: 29.04.2024 Pronounced on : 30.04.2024 HON’BLE SHRI SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A)

Sri Biswa Nath Parida (Gr C), aged about 55 years, son of Shri Trinath Parida, At/Po Kumbharmunda Kate, PS. Bangiriposi, Dist. Mayurbhanj, presently working as Medical Assistant, ARC Hospital, CharVbEaRtiSaU, CSh owdwar, Dist Cuttack.

......Applicant

1. Union of India through Cabinet Secretary to the Govt. of India, East Block-V, R.K.Puram, New Delhi, PIN-110 066.

2. Special Secretary, Aviation Research Centre Head Quarters, East Block-V, R.K.Puram, New Delhi, PIN-110066.

3. Director, Aviation Research Centre, East Block V, R.K.Puram, New Delhi-110 055.

4. Deputy Director (A), Aviation Research Centre, Director General of Security, Cabinet Secretariat, East Block-V, R.K.Puram, New Delhi-110 066.

5. Joint Director (Admn.), Aviation Research Center, Charbatia, Choudwar, Cuttack-754 028.

......Respondents For the applicant : Mr. S.K. Ojha, Counsel For the respondents : Ms. S. Behera, Counsel

O R D E R

SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J):

Shri B.N. Parida, the applicant who is working as Medical Assistant, ARC Hospital, Charbatia, Chowdwar, Cuttack has filed this O.A under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 stating inter alia that chargesheet under Rule 14 of the CCS (CC&A) Rules, 1965, alleging committing of omission and commission was issued to him vide Memorandum dated 06.12.2012(Annexure-A/2). The matter was enquired into. The Inquiry Officer(IO) submitted its report holding the charge as proved. The Disciplinary Authority(DA) did not accept the report of the IO and directed for de-novo inquiry. The matter was inquired into by the IO and submitted its report. The denovo enquiry was challenged by the applicant before this Tribunal in O.A. No.561/2014. The said O.A. was disposed of on 19.01.2018 remitting the matter back to the DA to resume the proceedings from the stage where Rule-15 of CCS (CC&A) Rules, 1965, came into picture and complete the same within a period of 60 days. Thereafter, the DA appointed another IO who inquired into the allegation. Copy of written brief of the PO dated 10.6.2013 along with disagreement note was supplied to applicant vide Office Memorandum dated 03.03.2018 (Annexure-A/3). On 17.04.2018 applicant submitted his reply. The applicant received another office Memorandum dated 30.05.2018 enclosing there to a copy of the report of the IO to submit his reply. The applicant submitted representation dated 14.06.2018 questioning the very exercise of the power by the DA. The DA issued the order of punishment vide Memorandum dated 27.07.2018. The applicant preferred appeal on 24.08.2018. The Appellate Authority (AA) rejected the appeal vide order dated 03.07.2019. Hence, the prayer of the applicant in this O.A. is to quash the order of the DA dated 27.07.2018 (Annexure-A/7), order of the AA dated 03.07.2019 and direct the Respondents to pay him all his service and financial benefits retrospectively.

2. The Respondents have filed their counter stating therein that applicant while performing duties as Medical Assistant, ARC Hospital, Charbatia, Chowdwar, Cuttack alleging grave omission and commission which is unbecoming on the part of a Government Servant, chargesheet under Rule 14 was issued to the applicant vide Memorandum dated 06.12.2012. The applicant submitted his defence denying the allegation on 28.12.2012. In consideration of the gravity of the offence, reply of the applicant and the records, the DA decided to proceed with the inquiry. Accordingly, the matter was entrusted to the IO to inquire into and submit the report. The IO after inquiry submitted its report to DA. The DA found infirmity in the said report and therefore, in exercise of powers conferred under Rules ordered for denovo inquiry which decision was challenged by the applicant in O.A. No.561/2014. This Tribunal set aside the or