Disciplinary charge sheets cannot be quashed routinely; grievances must be addressed to the disciplinary authority first.

ORDER:

Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.2 in passing orders in Memorandum No.BGL/HR/Disc-01/2023, dated 20.04.2023, along with the alleged Articles of charge, and Memorandum No.BGL/DP/IO/Appointment/07/2023/01, dated 04.07.2023, and as that of respondent No.5 in issuing Order No.BGL/Inquiry/ DGB/2023, dated 29.07.2023, initiating enquiry against the petitioner and also non-payment of transfer benefits to the petitioner, the present Writ Petition is filed.

2) Heard Mr. Chavali Ramanand, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.Shiv Pandey, learned counsel, representing Sri Khamar Kiran Kantamneni, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents.

3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after concluding the alleged enquiry and passing of the illegal orders dated 11.11.2022, 06.12.2022 and 03.01.2023, for payment of money and starting the illegal deduction of money from the salary of the petitioner, which are the subject matter of W.P.No.18172 of 2023, the respondents as an afterthought, and to doubly jeopardize the interest and rights of the petitioner, have erroneously and arbitrarily issued impugned Memorandum dated 20.04.2023 and framed charges illegally, incorrectly and arbitrarily on the same issue of alleged advances paid to the petitioner, while adding up some more untenable charges with false allegations and averments. Further, when the petitioner has requested for issuance of documents and access to his earlier email, the respondents have insisted the petitioner to submit his response on the alleged charges. Having left with no other option, the petitioner has submitted preliminary explanation reserving his right to submit a detailed explanation after receiving the documents and access to his email requested for and also requested for dropping further procedure. Without considering the said explanation, respondent No.2 has appointed respondent No.5 as an Inquiry Officer to conduct the alleged inquiry vide order dated 04.07.2023. In pursuance thereof, respondent No.5 has issued notice dated 29.07.2023 fixing the date of inquiry as 05.08.2023. It is further submitted that earlier the respondents have concluded an inquiry and taken action thereon and therefore it shall not lie in the realm of the respondents to again initiate a separate action. Further, the issuance of Memo of charges dated 20.04.2023, appointment of Inquiry Officer and conducting of Inquiry are belated, time barred and without power, authority or jurisdiction and the entire series of acts initiated against the petitioner lack bonafides, perverse, nothing but victimization and harassment with ulterior motives.

Therefore, the action of the respondents, more particularly, of respondent No.2 in passing the order dated 20.04.2023 along with the alleged Articles of Charge, and proceedings dated 04.07.2023 appointing Inquiry Officer and issuance of orders dated 29.07.2023 is illegal and prayed to set aside the same.

4) Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that respondent No.1 has been reminding its employees including the petitioner for submission of invoices against the advances to the employees & suppliers since April, 2019, and the said communications of respondent No.1 in that regard were deliberately suppressed by the petitioner before this Court. Further, the respondents have categorically given the details of advances received by the petitioner, which he has not denied. However, as the petitioner is unable to give any proof of the bills allegedly submitted, an adverse inference can be drawn against the petitioner. Though the petitioner was given abundant opportunities to defend his case, he did not produce any evidence to prove his innocence. Despit