it2025_00911 — Applicant filed the OA for quashing the Order, dated 2-3-2015 and the modified Order, dated 19-2-2018 imposing the penalty on the Applicant by the disciplinary authority

Applicant filed the OA for quashing the Order, dated 2-3-2015 and the modified Order, dated 19-2-2018 imposing the penalty on the Applicant by the disciplinary authority — The Applicant's OA challenging a penalty imposed for an accounting fraud is dismissed, as the appellate authority found that the Applicant did not conduct proper inspection during the required period... — Facts: Applicant was required to inspect the accounts at the Baghara BO. A fraud to the tune of ₹ 1,88,909. 40 was found in account with Morigaon MDG during the period from August, 1999 to June, 2004. Upon enquiry, the disciplinary authority imposed two penalties namely, recovery of ₹ 50,000 from the Applicant and stoppage of one increment. The Applicant preferred appeal to the appellate authority. As per Order, dated 20-5-2016 in O.A. No. 162 of 2016, the appellate authority was directed to dispose of the appeal within three months. The order under challenge in this OA, is in compliance of the order of this Tribunal, dated 20-5-2016. The appellate authority modified the penalty by restricting the penalty to the recovery of ₹ 50,000 only. Though the inspection was carried out by the Applicant in 2001, the memorandum of charge-sheet was issued only in 2014, nearly after 14 years. Moreover, two passbooks which were not inspected by him, did not have any connection to the fraud committed by the Baghara BO. The Applicant cannot be found fault. Hence the OA. Respondents contended that the Applicant was afforded a full opportunity to defend his case and there is no merit in this OA.