Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17353 of 2018 Petitioner :- Union Of India And 2 Others Respondent :- Desh Raj Shukla Counsel for Petitioner :- Avinash Chandra Srivastava
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Sri Ashish Srivastava, Advocate files his Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent no.1. The same is taken on record.
Heard Sri Avinash Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ashish Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.
This is a writ petition filed on behalf of the Union of India and the Postal Department challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 03.11.2016 passed in Original Application No.932 of 2009 (Desh Raj Shukla Vs. Union of India and Others) as well as the order dated 26.03.2018 passed in Civil Misc. Review Application No.330/00024-A of 2017 (Union of India and Others Vs. Desh Raj Shukla).
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent filed an Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad seeking quashing of the order dated 15.01.2008 as well as the order dated 22.04.2009 passed in the departmental proceedings with the further prayer to restrain the respondents from recovering an amount of Rs.4,06,000/- from the applicant therein.
The undisputed facts are that the respondent was issued a chargesheet on 15.02.2006 while working on the post of Sub Post Master, Mohangunj, Shahjahanpur on an allegation that he had made withdrawal of National Saving Certificates amounting to Rs.8,06,000/- and paid the same in favour of the Executive Engineer, Jal Nigam, Shahjahanpur. The allegation against the respondent was that no N.S.C. could have been issued in favour of the Society as the same practice had been discontinued by the letter of the Director General, (Post) dated 09.10.1995.
The defence of the respondent was that the letter dated 09.10.1995 had never been circulated in theSub Post Office. He further submitted that the original National Saving Certificates were issued by one Chandra Prakash, Sub Post Master amounting to Rs.4,00,000/- in the name of P.J. Basil, Executive Engineer, Jal Nigam, Shahjahanpur in 1998 and this amount together with interest now amounting to Rs.8,06,000/- which was then paid by the respondent to the incumbent Executive Engineer, Jal Nigam on maturity.
We have gone through the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has recorded a clear finding that the letter of the Director General (Post) dated 09.10.1995 was never circulated or brought to the knowledge of the respondent nor the original National Saving Certificates were issued by him and therefore there was no irregularity in the payment of the Saving Certificates with interest to the Executive Engineer, Jal Nigam, Shahjahanpur. A chargesheet was issued to the said Chandra Prakash the then Sub Post Master who had issued the N.S.C. but the only punishment imposed against him was of withholding of one increment for two years without cumulative effect with recovery of Rs.4,000/- whereas the petitioner has been saddled with the punishment of recovery of Rs.4,06,000/- which was wholly irrational considering that the original National Saving Certificates were never issued by the respondent in the first instance.
We have also gone through the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer at page 124 of the paper book and we find that the Enquiry Officer has also recorded a clear finding that the letter of the Director General (Post) dated 09.10.1995 had never been circulated at the Divisional level. In the circumstances the respondent could not have had knowledge of the same yet the respondent was still held guilty on the ground that he ought to have knowledge of the working. We fail to understand as to how the respondent could be expected to have knowledge of the letter of the Director General (Post) dated 09.10.1995 which was never circulated at the Divisional level. The finding recorded by the Tribunal also shows that by the letter dated 09.10.1995 this practice was discontinued.
In paragraph 3 of the order of the Tribunal it is stated that the issuance of Saving Certificates in the name of Society were discontinued under the letter of the Director General, (Post) dated 09.10.1995. Therefore, unless the letter dated 09.10.1995 discontinuing the earlier practice of issuing of Saving Certificates to the Societies was not communicated to the respondent, the respondent cannot be held guilty. This letter was never circulated in the Divisional Office and the respondent had no knowledge of the same therefore he could not be held guilty of violation of any instructions contained in the letter dated 09.10.1995. We also find that there is no allegation of defalcation or embezzlement of public money against the respondent.
For reasons aforesaid, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order of the Tribunal dated 03.11.2016.
The writ petition is wholly devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 23.8.2018/N Tiwari