9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 1101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e notice (referred to as the first notice ) issued to the respondent by the appellant on 29.12.1998. It was alleged in the first notice that the respondent had been given appointment by the appellant in 1976 on the basis of his claim that he belonged to a Schedule Tribe against a post reserved for Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe. A caste certificate had been submitted by the respondent at the time of his appointment which had been issued by the Tutor, Department of Pathology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad and attested by the Tahsildar, Hyderabad Urban Taluk without the signature of the concerned Tahsildar. As the caste certificate was not in the prescribed form from the competent authority, the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Witnesses were examined and an inquiry report was submitted on 29.4.1999. The Inquiry Committee came to the conclusion that the caste certificate dated 4th February, 1998 had turned out to be a bogus certificate. It was however noted that the original caste certificate submitted by the respondent in 1976 had been affirmed by a certificate issued from the office of the Collector, Hyderabad on 11.3.1999. The Inquiry Committee was of the view: Merely securing a wrong or false certificate, by itself does not amount to a misconduct. The certificate may be false due to ignorance or incompetence and therefore a wrong or false certificate does not necessarily create delinquency on part of the person who produces it. 6. Accordingly, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ishment of dismissal from the services of the Company without retirement benefits in full as per Clause No. 20(i) of the Certified Standing Orders applicable to you. 8. Clearly, the Disciplinary Authority was yet to make up his mind as to the guilt of the respondent. 9. According to the appellants, the challenge to the proceedings was premature and the High Court should not have entertained the writ application as disputed questions of fact were involved. However, we do not wish to deal with this aspect of the matter as the High Court by the order under appeal has issued a Rule Nisi and it will be open to the appellants to raise this and other contentions in their answer to the Rule. We are not aware as to the reason why the High Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... linary Authority, the substance of the impugned notice in no way differs from that of the first notice. 12. The third decision noted by the respondent viz. State of Madhya Pradesh V. Bani Singh and Anr. 1990CriLJ1315 is also inappropriate. The decision related to disciplinary proceedings initiated in respect of incidents which had taken place 12 years earlier. It was said: ...The irregularities which were the subject matter of the enquiry is said to have taken place between the years 1975-77. It is not the case of the department that they were not aware of the said irregularities, if any, and came to know it only in 1987. According to them even in April 1977, there was doubt about the involvement of the officer in the said irregularit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
