Central Administrative Tribunal
Ashok Kumar vs EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION (ESIC) on 26 October 2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD
Order Sheet
Item no.: 7
O.A./541/2026 (AHMEDABAD)
[ CHARGE SHEET ]
Court No.: 1
No of Adjournment:
Order Dated: 26/10/2026
ASHOK KUMAR
Vs
EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION (ESIC)
For Applicant(s) Advocate : PREETI DIXIT
For Respondent(s) Advocate :
Order of The Tribunal
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. In the instant OA, the applicant being aggrieved with Charge Memorandum dated 18.03.2025 and Inquiry Report dated 25.09.2026, has filed the present OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 seeking relief as prayed for in para 8 and interim relief as prayed for in para 9 of the OA.
2. In support of the prayer sought in this OA, Ms. Preet Dixit learned counsel for the applicant mainly submitted as under:- 2.1 That the applicant was appointed as MTS in the year 2012 and the departmental inquiry was held against him in respect to the charges of impersonation for which the sole documentary material relied upon by the Disciplinary Authority is opinion of the handwriting expert of CFSL. 2.2 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that without there being any coroboration, the said handwriting expert opinion of the year 2024 cannot be made a basis to sustain the charge levelled against the applicant. In this regard, learned counsel relied on the order passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 127/2022 dated 04.05.2023 wherein it has been held that in abscense of any coroborative evidence to the hand writing expert opinion, the charges levelled against the employee cannot sustain. The said observation and findings of this Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 2.3 It is stated that the initiation of disciplinary proceedings strictly on the basis of a CFSL handwriting report, without any other imputation of misconduct or corroborative evidence of impersonation is legally invalid.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available on record.
4. Considering the aforesaid submissions, we are of the considered opinion that prima facie case has been made out by the applicant for intervention of this Tribunal; "Issue Notice" to the respondents on "OA" as well as on "Interim Relief", returnable on 26.11.2026. In the meantime, by way of an ad-interim relief, the respondents are restrained not to proceed further with the Inquiry Report dated 25.09.2026 pursuant to Charge Memorandum dated 18.03.2025.
5. D.S. is permitted through the applicant for the Respondents No. 3 to 5 and liberty is granted to serve the other respondents through speed post.
Sanjiv Kumar Member (A) Jayesh V Bhairavia Member (J) Pratik Vyas ( steno 'c' )