Judicial review in disciplinary proceedings limited to natural justice compliance, evidence existence, and perversity; no re-appreciation of evidence or penalty proportionality unless shocking conscience.

ORDER

Per: Hon’ble Shri Jayesh V Bhairavia, Member (J)

1. The present OA has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, seeking following reliefs: -

“Para 8

(A). The Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to quash and set aside charge sheet bearing No. Admn/G& SSA/Disc Case/Kuldeep Singh/2014 (Charge Sheet), dated 11-2- 2015, Inquiry Officer’s Report dated 10-11-2015, Disciplinary Authroity’s order dated 26.02.2016, Appellate authority’s order dated 05.09.2016 and Revisonal Authority’s order dated 22-6-2017 , being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, contrary to settled legal position and in utter violation of Principles of natural justice, null and void.

(B). Be pleased to allow this petition with costs and be pleased to quantify the cost.

(C). Be pleased to grant all consequential reliefs and such other/further reliefs as may be deemed just and proper by the Hon’ble Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Brief facts of the case as stated by the applicant are as under: -

2.1 The Applicant while working as a Assistant Audit Officer, in SS-II Group in the office of the Accountant General (G & SSA) Gujarat Rajkot, came to be served with charge memorandum dated 11.02.2015 under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, inter alia alleging that the applicant showed utter disregard to office Rules and Regulations and lacked devotion to duty (Annexure A/1 refer).

2.2 On denial of the alleged charges by the applicant, the Disciplinary Authority appointed Inquiry officer as well as Presenting Officer to conduct departmental inquiry in respect to the charges levelled against the applicant in the charge memorandum dated 11.02.2015. The applicant participated in the departmental inquiry and after the Presenting Officer submitted his written brief on 31.7.2015, the applicant submitted his defense brief on 17.8.2015. Consequent thereto and upon completion of the inquiry, the Inquiry officer submitted his inquiry report dated 10.11.2015 wherein the findings have been recorded that the charges levelled against the applicant stands proved (Annexure A/4 refer).

2.3 The Disciplinary Authority vide his communication dated 25.11.2015 forwarded a copy of said inquiry report dated 10.11.2015 to the CO i.e., applicant herein with a direction to submit his representation on the said inquiry report within 15 days.

2.4 However, the applicant being aggrieved with said inquiry report had approached this Tribunal by way of filing OA No. 206/2015. Since, the charged officer i.e., the applicant herein did not follow the remedy available to him under the CCS (CCA) Rules and the said OA being found premature, this Tribunal accordingly disposed of the OA vide Order 26.11.2015 (Annexure A/7 refer).

2.5 Thereafter, in response to the inquiry report dated 10.11.2015, the applicant submitted his representation dated 07.12.2015 before the Disciplinary Authority and requested to drop the charges levelled against him on the ground that IO has erroneously recorded findings against him.

2.6 By considering the material on record as well as the representation of the CO, i.e., the applicant, on the inquiry report, the Disciplinary Authority vide his order dated 26.02.2016 held that charges levelled against the applicant stands proved and had imposed major penalty of removal from service with immediate effect upon the applicant (Annexure A/6 refer).

2.7 Thereafter, being aggrieved with the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority dated 26.02.2016, the