Disciplinary Authority must follow Rule 15(2) CCS (CCA) Rules by giving reasons for disagreeing with exonerating inquiry report; Rule 19(ii) inapplicable after inquiry held; non-speaking dismissal orders violate natural justice.

ORAL ORDER

Per: Justice M.G. Sewlikar, Member (J)

1.Both these OAs are being disposed of by a common order as the question involved in both these OAs is identical.

2. In OA No. 434/2022, the applicant was working as Accountant cum Typist (ACT) in Nehru Yuva Kendra, Gadchiroli.

2.1. An FIR was lodged by one Archana L. Chudhary, Secretary, Navdrushti Yuvti Mandal, alleging corruption against the applicant. Allegations against the applicant in OA No. 435/2022 were also made regarding corruption.

2.3. Accordingly, on 05th April, 2019, applicants in both the OAs were placed under suspension. Before placing them under suspension, the applicants were arrested and detained by CBI for 48 hours.

2.4. Memorandum of charge was served on 20^th June, 2019 and in another OA i.e. in OA No. 435/2022, memoranda of charge was also served, on the same date on the applicant. Both the applicants tendered their replies. Enquiry was conducted against both the applicants and Inquiry Officer exonerated both of them.

2.5. The Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 09^th December, 2020 passed the order of dismissal against both the applicants. This order is impugned in both these OAs.

2.6. Learned counsel for the applicant invited our attention to the impugned order dated 09^th December, 2020 (Annexure-14) in OA No. 434/2022. He submits that this order is bereft of any reason. The applicant has been terminated by invoking powers under Rule 19 (ii) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and penalty of “Dismissal from service” has been imposed on both the applicants.

2.7. Learned counsel further submits that power under Rule 19 (ii) of the CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 cannot be invoked as no reason has been assigned for the same. Similarly, no reason has been assigned for not accepting the report of the Inquiry Officer.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents tried to support order of the Disciplinary Authority contending that the allegations against the applicants are serious and they were arrested red-handed while accepting the amount.

4. We have given serious consideration to the submissions made by the respective parties.

5. The order is of less than a half page and we deemed it appropriate to produce the entire order:

“Ref. No. NYKS/G&V (Vig.)/2020/842  Dated 09^th December, 2020

ORDER

WHEREAS, a memorandum No. NYKS/V&G (Vig.)/2018-19/1052 dated 20^th June, 2019 along with chargesheet was issued to Shri Akhilesh Prasad Mishra, ACT, NYK, Nagpur, Maharashtra for initiation of departmental proceeding against him under rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on the following Articles of charge:

Articles of charge-l it is alleged that Shri Akhilesh Prasad Mishra, while posted at ACT at NYK, Gadchiroli during 2019 has been caught red handed by CBI (ACB), Nagpur while demanding and accepting bribe of Rs. 7000/- from Ms. Archna L. Chudhari, Secretary, Nav Drushti Yuvkti Mandal, Sakhra, Gadchiroli on 03.04.2019 as a reward for sanctioning an amount of Rs. 26,000/- for undertaking "Malhila Shivankala Prashikshan" programme to her club. Thus, Shri Akhilesh Prasad Mishra failed to maintain absolute integrity and thereby violated the rule 3(1) (i) of CCS(Conduct) Rules, 1964.

AND WHEREAS, vide order No. F-315/Vig./2019-20/1196 dated 2^nd September, 2019 inquiring authority was appointed to conduct inquiry into the charges;

AND WHEREAS, the Inquiring Authority vide letter No. नेयूके सं/महा गोवा/जांच /262/2020 दिनांक 07.09.2020 submitted his report with the findings on the articles of charges against the charged officer;

AND WHEREAS, considering CBI's report and materials on record, the 10's