AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. M. Sahai, J.—We have heard Mr. Rutvij Bhatt, learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
This Special Civil Application has been filed challenging order dated 13.3.2003 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad, in Original Application No. 460 of 1999.
Brief facts of the case are as under:
3.1. Petitioner Shri N.D. Patel, while functioning as Sepoy, C.H. Sanjan Bulsar during the year 1985 failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty inasmuch as, he instead of bringing to the notice of Assistant Collector, Customs, Bulsar the fact that Shri H.D. Shah, Superintendent of Customs, Sanjan (Now under suspension) had recovered on 25.5.1985 some contraband gold lagadies (biscuits) each weighing 10 tolas and having markings of foreign origin (which were liable for seizure/ confiscation under (i) Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 and (ii) Section 71 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 from the residential premises of Shri Mohan Kalan Patel, Sarpanch of the village Tadgam and surrendering one gold legady (biscuit) of ten tolas and having markings of foreign origin to the Assistant Collector, Customs, Bulsar which was given to him by Shri H.D. Shah, on 25.5.1985, he on the contrary, pocketed the said gold legady (biscuit).
3.2. The Petitioner, then Sepoy, C.H. Sanjan thereby contravened sub-rules (i) and (ii) of Rule 3(1) of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.
3.3. The aforesaid charge memorandum was received by the Petitioner through Assistant Collector of Customs, Bulsar''s letter No. II/10(A)(CON)/85 dated 24.3.1988.
3.4. Shri M.J. George, Superintendent (TECH) C. Ex. and Customs, Surat was appointed as Presenting Officer by the Collector, Central Excise & Customs, Surat under Order No. II/10(A)(CON)14/88 dated 3.7.1992. Shri Amit Cowshish, Commissioner of Department Inquiries was appointed as Inquiry Officer vide order No. U-II/10(A)/(CON)14/88 on 28.10.1992 to inquire into the charges framed against the Petitioner.
The Inquiry Officer, in his report dated 30.12.1993, found that the gold biscuits were recovered from the father-in-law and the wife of the Petitioner. Detailed gist of the inquiry report has been mentioned in impugned order dated 11.2.1997, by which the Petitioner was dismissed from service. The Original Application filed by the Petitioner has also been dismissed by affirming the findings recorded by the punishing authority.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has urged that since the Gold Control Act was repealed in the year 1990 and charges having been framed on the basis of the Gold Control Act, the Petitioner cannot be punished, as the dismissal order was passed subsequent to the repeal of the Act.
5.1. The argument of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is devoid of any merit. It is not disputed that the Petitioner was under a duty to report the recovery of the gold biscuits to his superior officers and gold biscuits would be confiscated or seized under the Customs Act, 1962. The departmental proceedings against the Petitioner have been carried out under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965. There will be no effect of repealing of the Gold Control Act in the year 1990 as the charge against the Petitioner was framed prior to it and the incident, on 25.5.1985, had also occurred prior to the repeal of the Gold Control Act. Therefore, the departmental proceedings carried out by the Respondents were perfectly just and legal. The dismissal order of the Petitioner has been affirmed the Central Administrative Tribunal.
In view of the above, we do not find any reason or ground to interfere with the impugned order. This Special Civil Application has no merits and is according dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.