Dismissal penalty shockingly disproportionate for procedural lapses without financial loss; lesser punishment mandated.

ORDER(ORAL)

PER SMT. URMITA DATTA SEN, MEMBER (J):

The instant O.A. has been filed by the applicant praying for the following relief(s):

“8.1 To set aside and/ or quash the Impugned Order dated 12.08.2016 passed by the Disciplinary Authority in terms of which further Inquiry was directed to be held by the Inquiry Officer as regards Charge No. VIII.

8.2 To set aside and/or quash the Impugned Order bearing Memo No. AN/1B/D/139/R.V. Sharma dated 17.05.2017 issued by the Disciplinary Authority i.e., the Controller of Defence Accounts, Guwahati, whereby, the respondent authorities has imposed the penalty of dismissal from service upon the applicant.

8.3 To set aside and/ or quash the impugned appellate Order bearing Memo No. AN/XIII/ 13600(785) / 2017 dated 28.03.2018 passed by the Appellate Authority i.e., the Controller General of Accounts, Ulan Batar Road Palam Delhi Cantt -110010 upholding the Order dated 17.05.2017 issued by the Disciplinary Authority, imposing penalty of dismissal of service upon the applicant.

8.4 To direct the respondent authorities to rescind/cancel and/or forbear from giving further effect to the said Impugned Order bearing Memo No. AN/1B/D/139/R.V. Sharma dated 17.05.2017 issued by the Disciplinary Authority imposing the penalty upon the applicant dismissing him from service;

8.5 To direct the respondent authorities to re-instate the applicant in his original post and also to be treated his dismissal period as on duty from the date of his dismissal;

8.6 Any other relief/reliefs to which the applicant is entitled to under the facts and circumstances of the case and deemed fit and proper;

8.7 Cost of this application.”

2. The brief facts as narrated in the OA are that the applicant joined the Defence Accounts Department in the year 1995 to the post of Clerk and after passing the departmental examination, he was promoted to the post of Auditor in April, 1999. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Section Officer and subsequently, promoted to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer(AAO) in the year 2007. While serving as such in Store Contract Section (SC-IV Section), applicant was served with a letter dated 21.07.2014 calling for explanation on certain irregularities found in his section. Applicant replied on 29.07.2014 denying the allegation and had submitted that he was entrusted to perform the said work by higher officials in addition to his duties in the Accounts Section. Thereafter, vide another Letter dated 06.08.2014, he was called upon to explain as to how Sri Tapan Das who was working under the Accounts Section have processed the Bills relating to his section. Further, it was alleged that the applicant used to process huge numbers of bills without authorization from the higher officials. According to the applicant, he had been entrusted the task of processing of the said bills pertaining to SC-IV section while he was under the strength of Accounts Section and that he had processed the bills with proper scrutiny and after verification of all relevant documents, the higher authority accorded sanction to the said bill. Further, as per the applicant, he has no official responsibility in tendering process and CFA/IFA is the concerned authority and they have power and responsibility in tendering process and pass the bills. However, the authority vide Letter dated 19.08.2014 informed the applicant that his replies are found to be not convincing and therefore, the competent authority had decided to initiate disciplinary proceeding against him.

3. Accordingly, Charge Sheet under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 was issued against the applicant vide Memorandum dated 17.05.2017 on the following nine articles of charge