The Madras High Court has allowed the writ petition, setting aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which had interfered with the disciplinary proceedings, and affirmed the punishment as modified by the Appellate Authority, with a reduction in the period of penalty.
The case arose from a challenge to the order passed by the CAT, Chennai Bench. The first respondent was appointed as an inquiry-cum-reservation clerk in 2006 and faced disciplinary proceedings following a preventive check at the reservation counter. It was alleged that multiple Tatkal tickets were generated on the basis of applications received from a single person, and no price of tickets had been collected during issuance, leading to a cash shortage. Consequently, the charge memo was issued, and after a full-fledged inquiry, a penalty was imposed. Later, the appellate authority modified the punishment after the filing of the first appeal.
After hearing the petition, the bench of Justice C.V. Karthikeyan and Justice K. Kumaresh Babu observed that the tribunal was not justified in setting aside the disciplinary action. Further, the Court has observed that the materials on record and the admitted factual aspects were enough for sustaining the findings in proceedings, where proof is assessed on the standard of probabilities. The court found no procedural violations to hold that the disciplinary proceedings stand vitiated.
Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the punishment as modified by the Appellate Authority was sustained, with a penalty reduced.
Appearances:
For Petitioner- ASGI AR. L. Sundaresan assisted by Advocate AR. Sakthivel
For Respondent 1- Advocate L. Chnadra Kumar
For Respondent 2- Tribunal
