CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH JABALPUR Original Application No.200/00044/2019 Jabalpur, this Friday, the 3^rd day of May, 2024 HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE SHRI KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Gorakh Nath Singh, S/o Late Inderjit Singh, DOB: 13/11/1962, Mob NO. 9425571010, Post- Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal R/o BKD-20, Sector 9, Bhilai – 490006 (CG)

-Applicant (By Advocate - Shri Akash Choudhary V e r s u s

1. Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Through its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Tax, North Block, New Delhi 110001

2. The Under Secretary (V&L)-I, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Central Board of Direct Tax, North Block, New Delhi 110001

3. The Chairman, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Tax, North Bock New Delhi 110001

4. Director General (Vigilance), Government of India, Second Floor, Jawaharlal Nehru Statdium, new Delhi 110003

5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), E5 Arera Colony, Metro Walk Building, Bhopal 462016 (M.P.)

- Respondents (By Advocate- S K Mishra)

(Date of reserving order: 29.01.2024)

Order By Shri Kumar Rajesh Chandra, AM.

The Original application has been filed by the applicant against the major penalty charge memorandum dated 13.12.2018 (Annexure A/1) served upon him under provisions of Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965.

2. Briefly, the case of the applicant is that the applicant while working under the respondents was served with a major penalty charge sheet dated 13.12.2018 (Annexure A/1). The impugned charge memorandum Article I, II and III would make it clear that no misconduct could be attributed towards the applicant and the respondents in an unjustified manner have framed the article of charges by taking into account an old incident of April, 2012. The action of the respondents in belatedly issuing charge sheet is illegal and objectionable and is liable to be quashed. The applicant gave reply to the said charge memorandum vide his detailed representation dated 10.01.2019 (Annexure A/2). The applicant submitted that for the incidence of 2012, he was issued show cause notice on 28.06.2017 which was served upon the applicant vide communication dated 19.07.2017 (Colly. Annexure A/3). The applicant after receiving show cause notice was shocked and surprised to know that allegations were levelled regarding survey proceedings which started on

16.04.22012 while applicant was holding the post of Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1 (2), Raipur. The applicant has humbly submitted before the authorities by preferring a representation dated 31.07.2017 (Annexure A/4). As the allegations for which he was served show caused were more than 5 years old, the applicant sought the copy of relevant documents but the request of the applicant was denied vide order dated 29.08.2017 (Annexure A/5). The applicant filed his reply on 30.11.2017 (Annexure A/6) along with the relevant documents. The respondents after a period of about 1 year served the major penalty charge sheet dated 13.12.2018 which is under challenge in this O.A.. The applicant is nearing the age of superannuation and being an officer of Group A services, the applicant’s promotional aspects are at sharp edge. The applicant vide office order No. 220/2017 dated 29.12.2017 (Annexure A/&) is being appointed and promoted in the grade of Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (JCIT) on Ad-hoc basis in Level 12 w.e.f. 01.01.2018.

3. In their reply, the respondents have stated that the applicant failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty and he was charge sheeted vide charged memorandum dated 13.12.2018 accordingly. It is further stated that the applicant had requested Addl. Director General (Vigilance) West vide his letter dated 31.07.2017 (Annexure 4 of the OA) to arrange for supply of copies of re