2009 (7) TMI 1220 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of disciplinary proceedings based on a pseudonymous complaint.
2. Whether the actions of the respondent constituted "misconduct" warranting disciplinary action.

Summary:

Issue 1: Validity of Disciplinary Proceedings Based on Pseudonymous Complaint

The respondent, a Commissioner in Customs and Excise, was issued a charge memo based on a pseudonymous complaint alleging irregularities in claiming transfer allowance and transportation advance. The Tribunal set aside the charge memo, citing CVC instructions that generally prohibit action on pseudonymous complaints unless they contain verifiable details. The Tribunal noted that the complaint was received when the respondent was due for promotion, which raised suspicion of mala fide intent. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that the complaint did not justify disciplinary action and appeared to be a tactic to delay the respondent's promotion.

Issue 2: Whether the Actions of the Respondent Constituted "Misconduct"

Article of Charge No. 1: The respondent had received an advance of Rs. 38,425/- for transporting household goods but returned the amount voluntarily before any action was initiated on the complaint. The High Court found that the respondent's actions did not constitute misconduct, as the advance was returned promptly and voluntarily, and there was no evidence of ill motive or financial loss to the government.

Article of Charge No. 2: The respondent delayed adjusting a TA advance of Rs. 16,000/- but eventually did so voluntarily. The High Court concluded that the delay did not amount to misconduct warranting disciplinary action, especially since the adjustment was made before the issuance of the charge memo.

The High Court noted that the charge sheet was issued after the respondent had been cleared for promotion, suggesting an ulterior motive to deny the promotion. The cumulative effect of the circumstances indicated that the disciplinary action was not bona fide. The writ petition was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's decision to quash the charge memo.