Atma Ram vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

Alok Singh, J.

Petitioner was appointed as Social Security Assistant in EPFO, Regional Office, Dehradun. A criminal case under the provisions of the Prevention

of Corruption Act was registered against the petitioner. Petitioner was convicted in the said case. Meanwhile, disciplinary proceedings were also

initiated against the petitioner. Respondent by invoking powers under Section 15 of the Provident Fund Staff (Classification, Control and Appeal)

Rules, 1971 dismissed the petitioner from service. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court.

Heard Mr. Advit Noliyal, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. B.S.Bisht, Advocate for the respondent and perused the record.

Mr. Advit Noliyal, Advocate for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of trial, petitioner was enlarged on bail and he was reinstated in

service. He further submits that against the order of conviction, petitioner has preferred appeal before this Hon’ble Court and till the decision is

taken in the said appeal, he may be permitted to continue as was done earlier.

Disciplinary proceeding and criminal proceeding are two different proceedings. Both have different outcome. Earlier, petitioner’s suspension

was revoked and he was reinstated but by that time disciplinary proceedings were not complete. Now, respondent department, after completing

disciplinary proceedings and complying with the provisions of 1971 Rules, has dismissed the petitioner from service.

I do find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order. No interference is called in the matter. Accordingly, writ petition fails and is hereby

dismissed. No order as to costs.