om:64-cl-2016-jun — Enhancement of punishment in a disciplinary case after an elapse of long time is bad in law. In the present case, the Applicant, a GDSMD at Guwahati SO, was issued with a charge-sheet for misappropriation of ₹ 16,800. The said amount was refunded immediately after issue of charge-sheet. But following the procedure, the Disciplinary Authority punished him by imposing a penalty of debarring him from the recruitment examination for the post of Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) f

GDS Rules

Enhancement of punishment in a disciplinary case after an elapse of long time is bad in law. In the present case, the Applicant, a GDSMD at Guwahati SO, was issued with a charge-sheet for misappropriation of ₹ 16,800. The said amount was refunded immediately after issue of charge-sheet. But following the procedure, the Disciplinary Authority punished him by imposing a penalty of debarring him from the recruitment examination for the post of Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) for Group 'C' and Postman for three years. However, the Revisional Authority, namely, CPMG removed him from service by following the procedure laid down. Enhancement of punishment after a long time when the initial punishment is awarded, is disproportionate and hence that order of removal was set aside retaining the original punishment — This chunk pertains to a case where an employee was initially penalized for misappropriation of funds, but later, after a long time, the punishment was enhanced from a debarment to removal from servi... — Facts: The Applicant herein, was charge-sheeted vide Memorandum, dated 19-11-1997 charging him with misappropriation of money amounting to ₹ 16,800 which amount was refunded by the Applicant immediately after issue of charge-sheet.The charge-sheet contained two Articles of charges for not crediting the amount thereby violating the provision of Rule 3 of the Rule for Branch Offices. He was punished by the Disciplinary Authority following rules by imposing the punishment of penalty by debarring him from the recruitment examination for the post of MTS for Group "C" and Postman for three years. However, the Revisional Authority, namely, CPMG enhanced the punishment after passage of long time when the Applicant was undergoing the punishment of Disciplinary Authority, the removal from service. Against that order this OA is filed. The Tribunal after hearing both sides and noting Rule 9 of the Rules of 2011 (which is reproduced in the judgment) for providing nature of penalties held that the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority will meet the ends of justice. In the case of UT of Dadra and Nagar Haveli v. Gulabhia M. LAD [ 2010 (5) SCC 775 ], it was held that "Court or Tribunal cannot interfere with discretion exercised by Competent Authority in imposition of punishment; unless the same suffers from illegality or procedural irregularity of material nature or punishment is shockingly disproportionate".

om:64-cl-2016-jun — Enhancement of punishment in a disciplinary case after an elapse of long time is bad in law. In the present case, the Applicant, a GDSMD at Guwahati SO, was issued with a charge-sheet for misappropriation of ₹ 16,800. The said amount was refunded immediately after issue of charge-sheet. But following the procedure, the Disciplinary Authority punished him by imposing a penalty of debarring him from the recruitment examination for the post of Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) f

GDS Rules

Enhancement of punishment in a disciplinary case after an elapse of long time is bad in law. In the present case, the Applicant, a GDSMD at Guwahati SO, was issued with a charge-sheet for misappropriation of ₹ 16,800. The said amount was refunded immediately after issue of charge-sheet. But following the procedure, the Disciplinary Authority punished him by imposing a penalty of debarring him from the recruitment examination for the post of Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) for Group 'C' and Postman for three years. However, the Revisional Authority, namely, CPMG removed him from service by following the procedure laid down. Enhancement of punishment after a long time when the initial punishment is awarded, is disproportionate and hence that order of removal was set aside retaining the original punishment — This chunk pertains to a case where an employee was initially penalized for misappropriation of funds, but later, after a long time, the punishment was enhanced from a debarment to removal from servi... — Facts: The Applicant herein, was charge-sheeted vide Memorandum, dated 19-11-1997 charging him with misappropriation of money amounting to ₹ 16,800 which amount was refunded by the Applicant immediately after issue of charge-sheet.The charge-sheet contained two Articles of charges for not crediting the amount thereby violating the provision of Rule 3 of the Rule for Branch Offices. He was punished by the Disciplinary Authority following rules by imposing the punishment of penalty by debarring him from the recruitment examination for the post of MTS for Group "C" and Postman for three years. However, the Revisional Authority, namely, CPMG enhanced the punishment after passage of long time when the Applicant was undergoing the punishment of Disciplinary Authority, the removal from service. Against that order this OA is filed. The Tribunal after hearing both sides and noting Rule 9 of the Rules of 2011 (which is reproduced in the judgment) for providing nature of penalties held that the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority will meet the ends of justice. In the case of UT of Dadra and Nagar Haveli v. Gulabhia M. LAD [ 2010 (5) SCC 775 ], it was held that "Court or Tribunal cannot interfere with discretion exercised by Competent Authority in imposition of punishment; unless the same suffers from illegality or procedural irregularity of material nature or punishment is shockingly disproportionate".

Original Rule Text

Original Rule Text