K. Krishnan vs The Director General of Posts and Others

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.—This writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P9 order, whereunder petitioner''s challenge against his compulsory retirement was turned down by the Central Administrative Tribunal.

We have heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

After going through the Tribunal''s orders and on hearing both sides, we notice that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner after noticing financial irregularities, by the Inspector of Post Offices. On the very next day, when the Superintendent of Post Offices conducted inspection, he noticed that the irregularities are of higher magnitude. The Department conducted detailed enquiry, and the Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of all the irregularities alleged against him. The punishment imposed on the petitioner for the financial irregularities is only compulsory retirement. Admittedly, even the Criminal Court has convicted the petitioner for misappropriation.

Even though learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appeal filed against the judgment and sentence in the Criminal Court is pending, we do not think there is any need for this Court to look into this, because the complaint against the enquiry is only for violation of principles of natural justice, in as much as the petitioner was not given all the documents relied on by the Department. However, we find that the cash shortage noticed on inspection was not denied by the petitioner, and he himself later made up the loss to the Department by depositing the amount. Therefore, we do not find any ground to interfere with the findings in the enquiry based on the evidence collected by the Department. The punishment itself which is compulsory retirement also cannot be said to be disproportionate to the gravity of the offences alleged and found against the petitioner.

The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.