Central Administrative Tribunal Mumbai Bench, Mumbai Original Application No. 2143/2020 (NAGPUR)

Order reserved on: 15.10.2025 Order pronounced on: 19.12.2025 Coram :

Hon’ble Mr. Shri Krishna, Member (A)

Hon’ble Mr. Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)

Shri Nitin Shankarrao Dighe (Perner No. 198901786)

Aged about 53 years, Occ. Sub Divisional Engineer (E.A.)

(Electrical Administration) B.S.N.L..

R/o 304, Jayanti Mansion 4, Manish Nagar, Nagpur-440 027.

…..Applicant (By Adv: Shri G.M. Shitut)

Versus

1. The Chairman Cum Managing Director (CMD), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Harish Chandra Mathur lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110 001.

2. The Director (HR)

(Appellate Authority)

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Harish Chandra Mathur lane, Janpath, New-Delhi-110 001. 3. Chief General Manager, (Disciplinary Authority)

B.S.N.L., MH Telecom Circle, 6th floor 'A' Wing, Admin Building, Juhu Road, Santa Cruz (West), Mumbai-400 054.

.... Respondents (By Adv: Ms. M.S. Tanna )

ORDER

Per : Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)

The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant, under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking therein the following reliefs: “1. Call for the record from the respondents.

2. Quash and set-aside the order dated

27.03.2019 (Ann. A-1) issued by Disciplinary Authority i.e. Respondent No.3 imposing the penalty of "Reduction of two stages in time scale of pay for one year with further direction that he will earn increments of pay during period of such reduction and on expiry of such period of reduction will not have effect of postponing future increments of his pay".

3. Ouash and set-aside the order dated

08.06.2020 (Ann. A-2) issued by Appellate Authority i.e. Respondent No.2 rejecting the appeal and confirming the penalty imposed by Disciplinary Authority.

4. Direct the respondents to restore the pay of applicant with all consequential benefits and to pay the arrears thereof with interest @

12% p.a.

5. Any other relief deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.

2. Brief facts of the case are that, on 04.07.2017, the applicant joined as a Junior Engineer (Electrical) in D.O.T. on 10.08.1989 at Jabalpur. While working in BSNL as Sub- Divisional Engineer with additional charge as Executive Engineer at Solapur, based on the advice of Chief Vigilance Officer dated 01.11.2016, the applicant was served with major penalty charge memo dated 04.02.2017 by Respondent No. 3 alleging monetary loss to BSNL by sanction against advances to staff without submitting account for earlier advance sanctioned. On 07.11.2017, the applicant received relied upon documents. On 07.11.2017, EO supplied 60 documents except retrenchment and recovery register and original copy of letter about non- submission of ACE-2 accounts as advised by vigilance on 07.11.2017 as these were not available. Thereafter, inquiry was conducted and inquiry was concluded. The presenting officer submitted brief on 01.01.2018 and the applicant has submitted defense brief and expressed his innocence and requested for exoneration on 22.01.2018. Thereafter, the inquiry report on 27.09.2018. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority issued punishment order dated 27.03.2019 imposing penalty of “Reduction of two stages in time scale of pay for one year with further direction that he will earn increments of pay during period of such period of reduction and on inquiry expiry of such period of reduction will not have effect postponing future increment of his pay.”

2.1. The aforesaid penalty order was served through vigilance officer’s letter dated 31.03.2019. Thereafter, appeal was submitted before the appellate authority which was rejected vide order dated 08.06.2020. The aforesaid orders are challenged by the applicant on the ground that the Disciplinary Authority decided to impose major penalty and confirmed by the Appellate Authority due to interference by Vigilance Officer and acted under pressure and without applyin