9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1369X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on to the respondents to grant service and monetary benefits due to the petitioner. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Junior Assistant on 06.03.1968 and subsequently promoted to the post of Selection grade Executive Officer, Town Panchayat on 19.10.2000. Owing to three charges levelled against him, he was kept under suspension by the second respondent and on the date of his superannuation, he was not allowed to retire from service. The primary charge raised relates to the purchase orders raised by him, without following the procedures laid down in G.O. No.149, dated 16.07.1998. 3. Denying all the charges, the petitioner made a detailed explanation, dated 30.04.2007 to the respondents. As regards Charge No.1, he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tunity to the petitioner, the 1st respondent/disciplinary authority, based on the oral enquiry conducted and on the explanation submitted by the petitioner, passed the impugned order, dated 15.10.2007 without examining any witnesses or marking any documents and the appellate authority, without noticing the discrepancy in the conduct of the enquiry, has mechanically affirmed the punishment imposed through a non-speaking order, which is wholly unsustainable. It is also the submission of the learned Senior counsel that the said order also suffers an inordinate and unexplained delay, which vitiates the punishment. It is the further submission of the learned Senior counsel that a perusal of the order of the appellate authority reveals that he ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is further submitted that reliance placed on similar case cannot be taken note of as the facts and circumstances of each case requires to be considered separately and further it is submitted that the delay in the disposal of the appeal is on account of administrative delay of which the petitioner cannot take shelter. Therefore, prays for dismissal of this writ petition. 6. This Court bestowed its best attention to contentions advanced by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 7. The non-following of the guidelines mandated in G.O. No.149, dated 16.07.1998 is admitted by the petitioner, but the case of the petitioner is only to the extent that he was not aware of the said Government Order. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c Service Commission, without entering into the merits of the appeal filed by the petitioner. No separate finding has been rendered by the appellate authority on the basis of the materials available before him. The order has been passed by the appellate authority mechanically without applying his mind to the materials available before him. In such a backdrop, this Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case where the matter has to be remanded back to the respondents. However, this Court is also oblivious of the fact that almost a to remand back the matter to the respondents. However, taking into consideration the fact that almost a decade and a half has passed since the alleged delinquency committed by the petitioner and further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
