Gujarat High Court
Ashokbhai Kantibhai Vataliya vs State Of Gujarat on 7 February, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 454 of 2016
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
ASHOKBHAI KANTIBHAI VATALIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ATIT D THAKORE(5290) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS NIRALI SARDA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR MITUL K SHELAT(2419) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 07/02/2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By way of present petition, under Articles 14, 16, 21
and 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
challenged order dated 21.2.2015 passed by respondent
No.3 and order dated 17.8.2015 passed by respondent
No. 2 dismissing the service of the petitioner and prayed
inter alia that:-
"(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue
appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and
setting aside the impugned order dated 21/2/2015
passed by the respondent no.3 [Annexure-A] and order
dated 17/8/2015 passed by the respondent no.2
[Annexure-A].
(B) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the
petition, be pleased to stay the implementation,
execution and operation of the impugned order dated
21/2/2015 passed by the respondent no.3 [Annexure-A]
and order dated 17/8/2015 passed by the respondent
no.2 [Annexure-A].
(C) To grant any such other and further reliefs as this
Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
(D) To award cost of the petition."
2. The brief facts giving rise to present petition are that
the petitioner was selected for the post of Junior Clerk
and was appointed as such on 22/9/1981 by the
respondent no.2 University. The petitioner had worked
with the respondent no.3 as Junior Clerk [Cash] for the
period of 24 years from 22/9/1981 to 8/5/2005.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
2.1 During initial period, the petitioner requested one Mr.
Mekwan to take charge of Cash, as it was condition in his
order of transfer to take charge of Cashier. However,
when Mr. Mekwan refused to take charge, the petitioner
informed head of the unit - Dr. P.C. Patel and when Dr.
P.C. Patel directed Mr. Mekwan to take charge of cash,
Mr. Mekwan refused to keep charge. Therefore, Dr. P.C.
Patel requested the petitioner to keep charge of cash with
him.
2.2 In the meeting of the employees held on 5/7/2007, Dr.
P.C. Patel had taken responsibility of any errors in the
cash and also made a statement that he will make
payment for the same and thus the charge of Cash was
continued with the petitioner.
2.3 For some irregularity in cash maintained by the
petitioner, the respondent no. 3 issued charge-sheet to
the petitioner, Dr. P.C. Patel and R.A. Vohra on 1/3/2011,
alleging that some financial irregularities have been
committed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
2.4 Thereafter, the petitioner submitted his reply dated
29/3/2011 to the charge-sheet explaining that so far as
allegation no. 1 is concerned, the amount of difference
has been deposited afterwards, the amount as alleged in
allegation no. 2 of Rs.1,735/- is correct and proper, so far
allegation no. 3 is concerned, the amount of Rs.1,900/- is
being recovered from the salary of the petitioner, etc.,
and ultimately submitted that the errors are being
committed because of some other difficulties.
2.5 Thereafter, Inquiry Officer Mr. R.M. Mehta was
appointed vide letter dated 12/9/2011 by the respondent
no. 3 and inquiry proceedings were commenced against
the petitioner and others. After completion of the inquiry,
the Inquiry officer submitted his report dated 31/7/2012,
wherein allegation nos. 1 to 8 are held as proved and
allegation nos. 9 to 12 are held as not proved.
2.6 Thereafter, respondent no. 3 issued show cause
notice dated 8/8/2012 to the petitioner and the petitioner
gave reply dated 24/8/2012 to the said notice, whereby
the petitioner has given consent to recover the amount
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
alleged with a view to file the notice considering the
service of 21 years rendered by the petitioner. Thereafter
the petitioner exchanged correspondence with the
respondent no. 3 relating to the inquiry. On the basis of
the inquiry report, the respondent no. 3 passed office
order dated 21/12/2012 dismissing the petitioner from
service.
2.7 Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of dismissal,
the petitioner preferred Appeal before the respondent no.
2 on 22/11/2013. The respondent no. 2 issued letter dated
15/9/2014 to the petitioner regarding date of hearing
being 20/9/2014. On 20/9/2014 the petitioner made
statement during the hearing to the effect that no
seriousness is shown while framing the charge, charge-
sheet is illegal, charge-sheet is not in prescribed format,
list of witnesses are not there with the charge-sheet,
when no charge is proved by any oral or documentary
evidence, then how it can be said that the charge is
proved, during inquiry Mr. V.S. Trivedi, Sr. Clerk, D.B.
Gohil, Sr. Clerk, etc. were not examined as witnesses, one
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
Mr. V.P. Mekwan was dismissed from service for one year
and 9 months and thereafter he was reinstated in view of
the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in the petition
filed by him etc. The petitioner has also made
representation dated 14/4/2014 to the respondent no. 2
narrating full details and raising all the issues therein and
that the punishment of dismissal from service is very
harsh relating to audit recovery and ultimately prayed to
reinstate him by setting aside the order of dismissal.
2.8 Thereafter, respondent no. 2 vide order No. AKV-
142013- 2942-K-2 dated 9/10/2014 remanded the matter
to the respondent no. 3 for deciding it afresh and that on
the basis of the decision that may be rendered by this
Hon'ble Court in the petition being S.C.A. No.
18084/2013 filed by Dr. P.C. Patel, the decision of the
punishment will have to be taken.
2.9 Thereafter the petitioner made several
representations dated 15/10/2014, 3/11/2014,
10/12/2014, 1/1/2015, 27/1/ 2015 , etc., for reinstatement
in service.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
2.10 The respondent no. 3 passed order dated 21/2/2015
confirming the dismissal order passed against the
petitioner.
2.11 The petitioner has made representations dated
25/2/2015, 27/2/2015, 9/3/2015, 17/3/2015, 25/3/2015
and 27/4/2015 to the respondent no. 2 for reinstating the
petitioner in service and that it is not proved on record
that the petitioner has made misappropriation, to decide
the case immediately as long time has elapsed, etc.
2.12 The respondent no. 2 rejected the appeal of the
petitioner vide impugned order dated 17/8/2015, wherein
it is held that both the petitioner and Dr. P.C. Patel are
responsible and hence, submission of the petitioner
cannot be accepted and the order of dismissal passed
against the petitioner has been confirmed.
2.13 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
impugned orders dated 21/2/2015 and 17/8/2015 passed
by the respondent authorities, the petitioner is compelled
to approach this Court by way of present petition.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
3. Heard Mr. Atit D. Thakore learned Counsel for the
petitioner Mr. Mitul K. Shelat, learned Counsel for the
respondent No.3 and Ms. Nirali Sarda, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for respondent No.1.
4. Mr. Atit D. Thakore, learned Counsel for the
petitioner has submitted that the appellate authority has,
after recording the findings and going through the
charges levelled against the petitioner, come to the
conclusion that the punishment imposed by the
disciplinary authority is very harsh in nature and
therefore, the appellate authority has remanded the
matter to the disciplinary authority for taking fresh
decision in the matter.
4.1 Mr. Atit D. Thakore, learned Counsel for the
petitioner has further submitted that though there is a
specific direction given by the appellate authority to the
disciplinary authority to reconsider the case, again the
disciplinary authority has without examining the issue or
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner passed
an order and therefore, the petitioner again approached
the appellate authority. On the second time also, the
appellate authority has without considering the
submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and the
findings recorded at the earlier point of time, confirmed
the impugned order and therefore, the petitioner has
preferred this petition to challenge the impugned order of
punishment.
4.2 Mr. Atit D. Thakore, learned Counsel for the
petitioner has submitted that though the appellate
authority, once come to the conclusion that the
punishment imposed is disproportionate to the charge
levelled against the delinquent i.e. present petitioner
however, without considering the submissions advanced
by the petitioner and without giving any independent
findings or without dealing with the submission made by
the petitioner has reaffirmed the order of the disciplinary
authority, which is arbitrary and against the principle of
natural justice and therefore, this Court may entertain
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
the petition and pass appropriate order by interfering in
the order of punishment imposed by the authority.
4.3 Mr. Atit Thakore, learned Counsel for the petitioner
has lastly submitted that at the first instance, the officer
who has passed the order remanding the matter, is sitting
in appeal and again passed an order, without considering
earlier observation made by him and therefore, great
prejudice is caused to the petitioner and therefore, Mr.
Atit Thakore, learned Counsel for the petitioner urges
before the Court the present petition may be entertained
and the Court may pass appropriate order of reduction of
punishment imposed by the authority.
5. Mr. Shelat, learned Counsel for the respondent has
relied upon the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the
respondent and more particularly, paragraph Nos. 4 and
5 of affidavit-in-reply, wherein the respondent has dealt
with the submission made on behalf of the petitioner in
detailed that why the punishment imposed upon the
petitioner is in proportion with the charges levelled
against the petitioner. The said paragraph Nos. 4 and 5 of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
the affidavit-in-reply read as under:-
"4. A. I state that the Petitioner was discharging his
duties as a Junior Clerk at the Animal Husbandry
Department at N.C. Farm of the Answering Respondent.
The Petitioner was having an additional duty of a
Cashier.
B. I state that the amount received by the farm and dairy
was required to be noted in the cashbook and the
consolidated register and such amount received was
required to be deposited in the bank by way of challan. I
state that it was found that a sum of Rs. 8,44,790.50 was
misappropriated. It was the duty of the cashier to
maintain the accounts and the register. I state that apart
from maintaining the cashbook the Petitioner was
required to check whether Drawing and Disbursing
Officer signs the cashbook. I state that the Petitioner
failed to observe his duties as a Cashier due to which the
amount received from the farm has not been deposited
within the prescribed time or a lesser amount than the
amount received was deposited.
C. I state that the Petitioner by its communication dated
14.07.2010 has agreed to misappropriating funds of the
Answering Respondent and has deposited part of the
amount with interest.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
D. I state that that on 01.03.2011 the Petitioner was
issued a charge sheet with regards to 12 charges of
misappropriation from the University Fund and
negligence in discharging duties. I state that the
Petitioner had not acted in accordance with Rule 1
(acceptance of money), Rule 4 (duties of keeping
account/discharging responsibilities) of the Gujarat
State Financial Rules, 1971 and committed breach of
Rule 3 of Gujarat State (Conduct) Rules, 1971. I state
that the Petitioner on 29.03.2011 replied to the same.
E. I state that the Answering Respondent instituted
departmental proceedings on 07.04.2011 against the
Petitioner after informing him of all the charges leveled
against him. I state that the hearing commenced on
12.09.2011 and ended on 23.05.2012. The enquiry
officer submitted his report on 31.07.2012. I state that
out of the 12 charges, 8 charges were established
against the Petitioner.
F. I state that on considering the report, the Petitioner
was issued a show cause notice on 08.08.2012. I state
that on 24.08.2012 the Petitioner replied to the show
cause notice. I state that the Petitioner in his reply
stated that Rs. 3,42,840.50 is required to be recovered.
Amongst various other ways the Petitioner suggested
that the amount be recovered from his salary.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
G. On 21.12.2012, the Vice Chancellor in exercise of the
powers vested in him imposed the punishment of
dismissal from service. I state that thereafter, the
Petitioner addressed a communication requesting
reinstatement.
H. I state that the order dated 21.12.2012 passed by the
Vice Chancellor was put up before the Board of
Management in its meeting dated 16.02.2013, vide item
no. 7.11.
I. I state that the Board of Management in its meeting
dated 23.01.2013 vide item no. 31.10 confirmed the
order of dismissal of the Petitioner.
J. I state that Petitioner preferred an appeal under
Section 50(3) of the Gujarat Agriculture University Act,
2004. The Agriculture and Cooperation Department by
its order dated 09.10.2014 remanded the matter to the
Vice Chancellor of the Answering Respondent and
directed the Answering Respondent to review the
punishment imposed on the Petitioner. The
departmental inquiry was found to be proper and
correct and the decision in Appeal was not challenged
by the Petitioner any further and became final.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
K. I state that on 10.12.2014, the Vice Chancellor of the
Answering Respondent addressed a communication to
the Petitioner directing him to appear. The Petitioner
appeared before the Vice Chancellor of the Answering
Respondent on 15.12.2014, The Petitioner thereafter on
01.01.2015 made a representation stating that he should
be reinstated.
L. I state that on 21.01.2015, the matter was again
placed before the Board of Management. The Board of
Management vide item no. 36.14 held that the Vice
Chancellor has the authority to take the decision.
M. I state that on 21.02.2015, the Vice Chancellor of the
Answering Respondent passed an order continuing the
order of dismissal against the Petitioner.
N. I state that the Petitioner preferred an appeal against
the order dated 21.02.2015. The Agriculture and
Cooperation Department, Government of Gujarat
confirmed the order of dismissal passed against the
Petitioner.
5. I submit that the decision of the Answering
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
Respondent is in compliance of law. I state that on
several occasions the Petitioner herein has admitted to
the misappropriation of the funds and in response to the
2nd show cause notice expressed his willingness to
refund the amount misappropriated. The charges
against the Petitioner have been proved in a full fledge
departmental inquiry. The validity of the departmental
enquiry has been found to be proper and the decision
has attained finality. On the question of punishment, the
matter has been reconsidered by the Competent
Authority and the order of dismissal has been found to
be proper and the said order has also been confirmed by
the State Government. I submit that having
misappropriated such a huge amount from the public
exchequer; having admitted to such misappropriation
and the misappropriation otherwise having been proved
in the departmental inquiry, the decision of the
Answering Respondent in terminating the services of the
Petitioner cannot be said to be unjust or illegal. The
charges against the Petitioner were serious in nature.
The Petitioner held an office of Trust. The punishment of
dismissal from services is just and proportionate to the
nature of the offence committed by the Petitioner. The
present writ petition is devoid of merits and is required
to be rejected as such."
5.1 Mr. Shelat, learned Counsel for the respondent, has
on merits also pointed out the gravement of 12 charges
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
levelled against the present petitioner and also relied
upon the specific findings recorded by the inquiry officer
which was subsequently confirmed by the appellate
authority. Mr. Shelat, learned Counsel for the respondent
has submitted that once the disciplinary authority, after
relying upon the report of the inquiry officer and after
going through record and proceedings and the evidence
led by the inquiry officer, has passed the order of
punishment, normally this Court while sitting in writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution
of India may not interfere in the findings recorded by the
inquiry officer and subsequently confirmed by the
disciplinary authority and appellate authority.
6. It is appropriate to take into account 12 - charges
levelled against present petitioner. The charges levelled
against present petitioner are as same as the charges
levelled against the petitioner of Special Civil Application
No. 18084 of 2013. The said 12 charges levelled against
present petitioner are as under:-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
"1. Charge -1 :-
As per Challan No. 204 dated 14/07/2010 of the
Co-Research Scientist N.C. Farm, Anand, cash balance
of Rs. 1,35,600/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Five
Thousand Six Hundred only) as on 31/03/2009 was
found to have been embezzled. The aforesaid amount
was deposited in the university fund on 14/07/2010. As
aforesaid amount was deposited in the university fund
after delay, interest of Rs. 21,896/- was deposited in the
university fund.
Thus, you committed financial embezzlement of Rs.
1,35,600/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Five Thousand Six
Hundred only) and accordingly, as per Rule 1 of the
Gujarat State Financial Rules - receipt of money and
Rule 4 - duties as regards maintenance of accounts,
which state that all money received in the office should
be taken into account without delay under the provisions
of the Constitution, and all financial transactions should
be properly accounted/entered in the prescribed Forms/
Registers. These accounts should be complete and
correct, accurate and despatched within the prescribed
date, which is not found to have been complied with.
Hence a serious financial negligence is shown in the
performance of (your) duties. By doing so, you have also
violated Rule 3(1)(1) of Gujarat State (Conduct) Rules,
1971 and you are liable for the same.
2. Charge 2 :-
As per Challan No. 205 dated 20/07/2010 of the
Co-Research Scientist N.C. Farm, Anand (enclosure 3),
as per per local fund audit para no. 22, financial
embezzlement of Rs. 1735/- (Rupees One Thousand
Seven Hundred Thirty Five only) was committed on
03/07/2008. The aforesaid amount was deposited in the
university fund on 14/07/2010. Thus, you committed
financial embezzlement of Rs. 1735/- (Rupees One
Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Five only) and
accordingly, as per Rule 1 of the Gujarat State Financial
Rules - receipt of money and Rule 4 - duties as regards
maintenance of accounts, which state that all money
received in the office should be taken into account
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
without delay under the provisions of the Constitution,
and all financial transactions should be properly
accounted/entered in the prescribed Forms/Registers.
These accounts should be complete and correct,
accurate and despatched within the prescribed date,
which is not found to have been complied with. Hence, a
serious financial negligence is shown in the performance
of (your) duties. By doing so, you have also violated Rule
3(1)(1) of Gujarat State (Conduct) Rules, 1971 and you
are liable for the same.
3. Charge 3 :-
As per local fund audit para no. 23 (enclosure 4),
the financial embezzlement of Rs. 19,046/- (Rupees
Nineteen Thousand Forty Six only) was committed
during the period from 17/09/2008 to 06/03/2009.
accordingly, as per Rule 1 of the Gujarat State Financial
Rules - receipt of money and Rule 4 - duties as regards
maintenance of accounts, which state that all money
received in the office should be taken into account
without delay under the provisions of the Constitution,
and all financial transactions should be properly
accounted/entered in the prescribed Forms/Registers.
These accounts should be complete and correct,
accurate and despatched within the prescribed date,
which is not found to have been complied with. Hence, a
serious financial negligence is shown in the performance
of (your) duties. By doing so, you have also violated Rule
3(1)(1) of Gujarat State (Conduct) Rules, 1971 and you
are liable for the same.
4. Charge - 4 :-
As per the column-2 (enclosure 5 to 36) of the form
for depositing money in the office, amount mentioned in
the column no. 4 was received on the date mentioned in
the column no. 3. The said amount has not been
deposited in the university fund till date and it appears
to have been embezzled.
Form Nos. for
Sr. depositing Remar
Date Amount
no. money in the ks
Office
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
1 12910 19/04/2006 26,900.00 Not
entered
2 13049 29/12/2006 14,423.00 in
Income
3 13053 05/01/2007 20,070.00 Registe
r as
well as
4 13139 16/08/2007 380.00 in Cash
Book
5 383192 25/09/2007 11,200.00
6 383194 06/11/2007 12,800.00
7 22629 26/12/2007 170.00
8 383197 03/01/2008 12,000.00
9 383198 11/01/2008 12,000.00
10 22906 17/01/2008 7,560.00
11 22911 28/01/2008 3,420.00
12 22916 12/02/2008 8,595.00
13 22917 26/02/2008 19,362.00
14 22918 27/02/2008 3,780.00
15 22919 07/03/2008 4,916.00
16 22920 10/03/2008 6,322.50
17 22921 12/03/2008 5,040.00
18 22931 23/04/2008 7,965.00
19 22936 02/05/2008 14,805.00
20 4604 16/05/2008 13,600.00
21 22937 17/05/2008 6,300.00
22 4605 05/06/2008 15,470.00
23 22953 19/07/2008 2,424.00
24 13177 21/07/2008 340.00
25 22955 24/07/2008 26,583.00
26 4608 12/08/2008 18,700.00
27 22958 12/08/2008 16,284.00
28 22959 22/08/2008 13,020.00
29 13181 26/08/2008 425.00
30 4609 15/09/2008 12,750.00
31 12787 16/10/2008 7,268.00
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
32 12791 18/11/2008 15,821.00
Total Sum :- 3,40,693.50
In view of aforesaid facts, as per Rule 1 of the
Gujarat State Financial Rules - receipt of money and
Rule 4 - duties as regards maintenance of accounts,
which state that all money received in the office should
be taken into account without delay under the provisions
of the Constitution, and all financial transactions should
be properly accounted/entered in the prescribed Forms/
Registers. These accounts should be complete and
correct, accurate and despatched within the prescribed
date, which is not found to have been complied with.
Hence, a serious financial negligence is shown in the
performance of (your) duties. By doing so, you have also
violated Rule 3(1)(1) of Gujarat State (Conduct) Rules,
1971 and you are liable for the same.
5. Charge - 5 :-
The following amount was received through receipt
book in the office. The said amount has not been
deposited in the university fund till date and it appears
to have been embezzled.
Sr. Receipt
Receipt No. Date Amount
no. book no.
3 342912 13/10/2007 1,600
Total Sum :- 2,849/-
In view of aforesaid facts, as per Rule 1 of the
Gujarat State Financial Rules - receipt of money and
Rule 4 - duties as regards maintenance of accounts,
which state that all money received in the office should
be taken into account without delay under the provisions
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
of the Constitution, and all financial transactions should
be properly accounted/entered in the prescribed Forms/
Registers. These accounts should be complete and
correct, accurate and despatched within the prescribed
date, which is not found to have been complied with.
Hence, a serious financial negligence is shown in the
performance of (your) duties. By doing so, you have also
violated Rule 3(1)(1) of Gujarat State (Conduct) Rules,
1971 and you are liable for the same.
6. Charge-6 :-
The total of closing balance of Rs. 39,465/- as on
12/01/2007 (enclosure 42) and income of Rs. 53,011/- as
on 15/01/2007 (enclosure 42) amount to Rs. 92,476/-,
but Rs. 87,776/- has been deposited in the university
fund (enclosure 4) and Rs. 4700/- has not been deposited
in the university fund till date and it appears to have
been embezzled. serious financial negligence is shown
in the performance of (your) duties. By doing so, you
have also violated Rule 3(1)(1) of Gujarat State
(Conduct) Rules, 1971 and you are liable for the same.
7. Charge-7 :
(1) Upon indicating in the consolidated register the
amount of Rs.0.90 less on 20/04/2002 (enclosure-45),
the amount of Rs.91/- less on 10/01/2007 (enclosure-46),
the amount of Rs.10,000/- less on 26/03/2007 (enclosure-
47) and thereby in total amount of Rs.10,092/- (In words
Rs.Ten Thousand Ninety Two only) and
(2) Upon indicating in the consolidated register the
amount of Rs.20,000/- (In words Rs.Twenty Thousand
only) less on 14/02/2008 (enclosure-48) and
(3) Upon indicating in the consolidated register the
amount of Rs.46,800/- (Rs.Forty Six Thousand Eight
Hundred only) less on 05/03/2008 (enclosure-49) and
(4) Upon indicating in the consolidated register the
amount of Rs.79,575/- (In words Rs.Seventy Nine
Thousand Five Hundred and Seventy Five only) less on
30/06/2008 (enclosure-50), the delinquent has shown
serious financial negligence and has not deposited till
date the aforesaid total amount of Rs.1,56,467/- (In
words Rs.One Lakh Fifty Six Thousand Four Hundred
and Sixty Seven only) in the university fund and it
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
appears the embezzlement has been committed.
Accordingly, you are responsible for the violation of rule-
3(1)(1) of the Gujarat Civil Services Rules (Conduct)
Rules, 1971.
8. Charge-8 :
Upon indicating less amount of Rs.20,000/- in the
cashbook on 19/12/2007 (enclosure-44), the delinquent
has shown serious financial negligence and has not
deposited till date the aforesaid total amount of
Rs.20,000/- (In words Rs.Twenty Thousand only) in the
university fund and it appears the embezzlement has
been committed. Accordingly, you are responsible for
the violation of rule-3(1)(1) of the Gujarat Civil Services
Rules (Conduct) Rules, 1971.
9. Charge-9 :
It is indicated in the register that during the period
from the month of April-06 to March-07, the income as
indicated in the column-4 below was received at
N.C.Farm, Chharodi. Against the same, the amount as
mentioned in the column-5 has been deposited through
chalan in the university fund.
No Month Conso. Total income Amount
receipt indicated in deposited in
reg. Page the register the bank
number through chalan
1 April-06 1 to 3 63189.00 20359.00
2 May-06 3 to 5 46766.00 63195.00
3 June-06 5 to 8 52231.00 52874.00
4 July-06 8 to 11 62545.00 35437.00
5 August-06 11 to 14 99116.00 102061.00
6 September-06 14 to 18 185586.00 138829.00
7 October-06 18 to 21 138506.00 151050.00
8 November-06 21 to 25 157164.00 115933.00
9 December-06 26 to 29 214754.00 295458.00
10 January-07 30 to 34 1476365.00 1219352.00
11 February-07 35 to 39 639128.00 856608.00
12 March-07 39 to 43 76192.00 133373.00
Total :- 3211142.00 3184529.00
Thus, as per the above details, upon indicating less
the amount of Rs.26,613/- (In words Rs.Twenty Six
Thousand Six Hundred and Thirteen only), you have
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
shown serious financial negligence and you have not
deposited till date the aforesaid amount in the university
fund and it appears the embezzlement of the amount has
been committed. Accordingly, you have violated the
provision of Rule-3(1)(1) of the Gujarat Civil Services
(conduct) Rules, 1971. You are responsible for the same.
10. Charge-10 :
It is mentioned in the register that during the
period from the month of April-07 to March-08, the
income as mentioned below in the column-4 was
received. Against the same, the amount as mentioned in
the column-5 has been deposited in the university fund
through chalan.
fund.
No Month Conso. Total Amount
Receipt income deposited in
reg. Page indicated in the bank
number the register through
chalan
1 April-07 1 to 3 265644.41 288802.41
2 May-07 3 to 8 101989.00 81963.00
3 June-07 9 to 19 558033.00 531935.00
4 July-07 20 to 27 128479.00 233508.00
5 August-07 27 111522.00 43924.00
6 September-07 31 to 32 139453.00 219343.00
7 October-07 34 65640.00 64772.00
8 November-07 37 122733.00 98483.00
9 December-07 40 73516.00 38533.00
10 January-08 43 618158.00 564855.00
11 February-08 48 91002.00 141779.00
12 March-08 50 96808.00 59935.00
Total :- 2372977.41 2367832.41
Thus, as per the above details, upon indicating less
the amount of Rs.5,145/- (In words Rs.Five Thousand
One Hundred and Forty Five only), serious negligence
has been shown, the said amount has not been deposited
to the university fund till date and it appears
embezzlement has been committed in the matter.
Accordingly, provision of rule-3(1)(1) of the Gujarat Civil
Services (Conduct) Rules, 1971 is violated. You are
responsible for the same.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
11. Charge-11 :
As per the consolidated register, from the month of
April-08 to March-09, the income as mentioned below in
the column-4 was received. Against the same, the
amount as mentioned in the column-5 has been
deposited in the university fund through chalan.
fund.
No Month Conso. Total Amount
Receipt income deposited in
reg. Page indicate the bank
number d in the through
register chalan
1 2 3 4 5
1 April-08 1 to 5 552813 358478
2 May-08 5 to 8 208776 326282
3 June-08 8 to 12 250298 204200
4 July-08 13 to 16 378579 32112
5 August-08 16 to 17 104428 321504
6 September-08 17 to 19 31500 90921
7 October-08 19 to 21 147659 68811
8 November-08 22 to 24 97453 147119
9 December-08 25 to 27 238360 218752
10 January-09 27 to 30 299012 353982
11 February-09 31 21020 21390
12 March-09 31 to 34 287223 287223
Total :- 2617121 2430774
Thus, as per the above details, upon indicating less
the amount of Rs.50,747/- (In words Rs.Fifty Thousand
Seven Hundred and Forty Seven only), serious
negligence has been shown, the said amount has not
been deposited to the university fund till date and it
appears embezzlement has been committed in the
matter. Accordingly, provision of rule-3(1)(1) of the
Gujarat Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1971 is violated.
You are responsible for the same.
12: Charge-12 :
Similarly, as per the revolving fund consolidated
register, it is indicated that during the period from the
month of April-08 to March-09, the income as indicated
in the column-4 below was received at N.C.Farm,
Chharodi. Against the same, the amount as mentioned in
the column-5 has been deposited through chalan in the
university fund.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
No Month Conso. Total Amount
Receipt income deposited in
reg. Page indicated in the bank
number the register through
chalan
1 April-08 13 209767.00 195554.00
2 May-08 14 to 16 634090.00 634205.00
3 June-08 16 to 21 539215.00 473853.00
4 July-08 21 to 22 27990.00 0.00
5 August-08 22 to 23 26035.00 52290.00
6 September- - 0.00 0.00
7 October-08 23 to 24 68542.00 68542.00
8 November-08 25 to 26 407157.00 407157.00
9 December-08 27 270664.00 254257.00
10 January-09 27 to 28 61799.00 78206.00
11 February-09 - 0.00 0.00
12 March-09 - 0.00 0.00
Total :- 2245259.00 2164064.00
Thus, as per the above details, upon indicating less the
amount of Rs.81,195/- (In words Rs.Eighty One Thousand One
Hundred and Ninety Five only), serious negligence has been
shown, the said amount has not been deposited to the
university fund till date and it appears embezzlement has
been committed in the matter. Accordingly, provision of rule-
3(1)(1) of the Gujarat Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1971 is
violated. You are responsible for the same."
7. In view of the submission of learned Counsel for the
petitioner that the punishment imposed by the authority
is disproportionate to the charge, I am of the opinion that
this Court should not sit in Appeal to evaluate the
evidence or the findings recorded by the inquiry officer
and confirmed by the disciplinary authority. This Court
has very limited scope to interference in the matter of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
departmental proceedings and the punishment imposed
by the disciplinary authority.
8. So far as submission made on behalf of the
petitioner that the disciplinary authority has passed the
order of punishment mechanically without considering
the submissions advanced by the petitioner and once the
appellate authority has remanded the matter then the
authority ought to have considered the matter
independently without influenced by the earlier order
passed by the authority is concerned, I am of the opinion
that in the similar petition being Special Civil Application
No.18084 of 2013, this Court has observed that the scope
of judicial review in the matter of disciplinary
proceedings is very limited and therefore, I am of the
opinion that present petition is devoid of any merit and
the same requires to be dismissed
9. From 2001 onward, the Hon'ble Apex Court is in
consistent view that the scope and ambit to interfere in
the findings recorded by the disciplinary authority is very
limited and lastly the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
State Bank of India Vs. A. G. D. Reddy reported in
2023 (3) All India Services Law General 117, has
observed the scope of judicial review and the
proceedings. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held and
observed in paragraph Nos. 32 and 37 as under:-
"32. From the above discussion, it is clear that it could not be
said that the Enquiry Report, the findings of the Disciplinary
Authority and the order of the Appointing Authority are
based on no evidence or are perverse. Even if we eschew the
report insofar as the aspect of nonsubmission of control form,
the transgression of the area of operation and non-
declaration of the immovable property and certain other
charges are concerned, the order of penalty can be
sustained.
36. It is now well settled that the scope of judicial review
against a departmental proceeding is very limited. It is not in
the nature of an appeal and a review on merits of the
decision is not permissible. The scope of the enquiry is to
examine whether the decision-making process is legitimate
and to ensure that the findings are not bereft he of any
evidence. If the records reveal that the findings are based on
some evidence, it is not the function of the Court in a judicial
review to re-appreciate the same and arrive at an
independent finding on the evidence. This lakshman rekha
has been recognized and le reiterated in a long line of
judgments of this Court.
37. In the present case, it could certainly not be said that the
report is based on no evidence or that it is perverse. The
learned Single Judge transgressed the limits of judicial
review in setting aside the enquiry proceedings and the
punishment imposed.
The Division Bench, in a short order has, after extracting a
part of the learned Single Judge's judgment, gone on to hold
that having perused the records of the enquiry they do not
find that the charges have been dealt with in any manner of
specificity. Thereafter they conclude that the learned Single
Judge was justified in arriving at its conclusion. We are not
able to sustain the orders of the learned Single Judge and the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/454/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/02/2024
undefined
Division Bench."
10. Considering principle enunciated by the Hon'ble
Apex Court and this Court from time to time, I am of the
opinion that the impugned order of punishment passed by
the disciplinary authority and confirmed by the appellate
authority does not deserve to be interfered with and the
petition does not deserve to be entertained. Hence, the
present petition is devoid of merits and the same
deserves to be dismissed.
11. For the foregoing reasons, this petition fails. Hence,
present petition is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged.
Interim relief, if any, shall stand vacated forthwith.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
SURESH SOLANKI
