Disciplinary proceedings invalid due to lack of evidence, procedural violations, and reliance on inadmissible evidence.

ORDER

(Delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

Shri Pradeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Manoj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents, were present at the time of hearing.

2. The instant original application has been filed seeking following relief:

“i. To set aside the impugned order dated 04.03.2020 passed by the Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Varanasi and Appellate Order dated 04.01.2021 passed by Chief Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Lucknow Zone, Lucknow (annexure no. A-1 and A-2 to the compilation – I)

ii. To pass such other order or direction as may be deem fit proper and expedient in the interest of justice.

iii. To award exemplary cost to the applicants for causing tremendous physical and mental harassment to the applicants.”

3. A compendium of the facts as have been narrated in the present original application has been filed by the applicant who is a permanent employee of the respondents, being aggrieved by the order dated 04.03.2020 passed by the Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Varanasi (Disciplinary Authority) wherein it was ordered that the pay of the applicant be reduced by two stages from his present pay of Rs. 72,100/- in pay level – 8 to Rs. 68000/- in pay level 8 for a period of two year with direction that the applicant will not earn increments of pay during the period of such reduction and on expiry of such period, the reduction will not have the effect of postponing the future increments of his pay in terms of major penalty as specified under the provisions of Rule 11(v) of the CCS (CCA) Rules , 1965. Applicant had challenged the aforesaid order dated 04.03.2020 before the Appellate Authority but the said authority upheld the order of the disciplinary authority vide its order date 04.01.2021 and thus the applicant is aggrieved by that order also.

Applicant has contended that he was wrongly framed for the misconduct which he did not commit and the same was adequately recognized by the inquiry officer subsequent to a full-fledged inquiry. However, the observation of Disciplinary Authority against the opinion of the inquiry authority that the applicant had falsified the records is absolutely baseless as the said records the defacement of which is being alleged, was not in the possession of the applicant who was posted in the other branch of the Division and he only acted as per the order of the superior officers. Applicant has also alleged that there are no cogent facts or legally sustainable evidences against him and he has just been targeted for unknown reasons. Further allegation of the applicant is that the whole facts as set out in the memorandum is concocted and entirely based on rumors and hearsay of disgruntled element to settle personal scores with the applicant.

4. We have heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the documents on record.

5. Initiating his arguments, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a case of no evidence. The disciplinary proceedings were started on the basis of rumors only. To substantiate this fact, learned counsel for the applicant referred to the annexure A- 3 of compilation – II (RUD-3) and further argued that Additional Commissioner Custom (P) Lucknow himself has mentioned in the letter dated 10.07.2015 that “It is being widely a rumor that out of the Rs. 93 lacs recovered, Rs. 25 lacs was pocketed by the Customs officials.” It is also argued that persons from whose possession Indian currency is said to have been recovered have not made any complaint nor they were examined during the inquiry. It is also argued that when both the persons in whose respect information had been received were intercepted and only Indian currency were re