SHIVMURTI vs Union Of India on 27 October 2026

O R D E R

PER HON’BLE JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA, MEMBER (J) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records.

2. Through this OA, applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) This Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to quash the orders dated 24th May 2016, 28th July 2016 and 15.04.2019 issued by Disciplinary Authority i.e. RespondentNo.4, Appellate Authority i.e. Respondent No.3 and Reviewing Authority i.e. Respondent No.2 respectively, contained as annexure No. A-1, A-2 & A-3 to O.A..

(ii) To direct the respondents to refund the excess amount recovered from the applicant alongwith interest thereon after deducting the surplus amount from the shortage amount.

(iii) To direct the respondents to grant all consequential benefits including arrears of salary after releasing the withheld increments.

(iv) To pass such other orders which are found just fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

(v) To allow the original application with cost.”

3. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that Disciplinary Authority has awarded two punishments to the applicant; one is minor i.e. order of recovery of Rs. 84527.73/- and other is major i.e. imposing the penalty of withholding of annual increment of pay for a period of two years with cumulative effect. It is composite punishment order which is impermissible in the eyes of law.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the judgment passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 341 of 2009 dated 05.03.2015 which is affirmed by the Hon’ble High Court in Writ -Service Bench No. 719 of 2015 on 9.5.2016, wherein in the same fact situation, authority was directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the aforesaid submissions and contended that matter may be remanded back to the appellate authority for passing fresh order.

6. In the impugned punishment order (Annexure No.A-1) the following punishment order has been passed:- “10. NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned in exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 15(4) of CCS (CC&A) Rules, 1965 as amended and any other enabling rules and regulations imposes on the said PN-2179 Shri Shivmurti, SK-I, CSD Depot, Agra (presently posted at O/o RM (North), BD Bari), the following penalty:-

a) To recover the net shortages value of Rs. 84527.73 (An amount of Rs. 82,500/- will be recovered in 15 months and the balance amount of Rs. 2027.73 can be recovered in the 16th installment.

b) Impose penalty of “Withholding of annual increment of pay for a period of two years with cumulative effect.”

7. In O.A. No. 341 of 2009, which is relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant, the operative order runs as follows: “13. Accordingly, the O.A. is allowed. Impugned order dated 24.12.2008 and order dated 18.52009 are quashed with all consequential benefits. Since the Govt. exchequer has suffered a loss, as such matter is remanded back at the stage of Appellate Authority to consider and decide which penalty is to be imposed upon the applicant whether minor or major. The same may be done within a period of 3 months form the date of certified copy of this order is produced and the decision so taken by communicated to the applicant. No order as to costs.

8. The aforecited judgment passed in O.A. No. 341 of 2009 has been upheld by the Hon’ble High Court in Service Bench No. 719 of 2015. The relevant portion of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court is being quoted below:- “Opportunity has already been given by means of the impugned judgment to the authority concerned to pass an appropriate order, therefore, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate that the authority concerned may pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The writ petition is devoid of merit. It is accordingly dismissed.”

9. From the perusal of the Para 10 of the impugned punishment order passed by disciplinary authority (Annexure No. A-1), page-11 of the paper-book, it is evident that order of recovery and imposing penalty of withholding the annual increment have been passed by the Disciplinary Authority, thus, both these punishments are amalgated punishment order.

10. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents with regard to remand the matter to the appellate authority is not tenable as punishment order has been passed by Disciplinary Authority. Hence, matter needs to be remanded back to the Disciplinary authority.

11. In view of the above, OA is allowed. Impugned order dated 24.03.2016, 28.07.2016 and 15.04.2019 are quashed. Matter is remanded back to the Disciplinary Authority to pass fresh orders in accordance with law. The said exercise shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the applicant forthwith. There is no order as to costs. Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Kumar) (Justice Anil Kumar Ojha) Member (A)

Member (J)

JNS Jay Narayan Singh Digitally signed by Jay Narayan Singh Date: 2026.10.28 13:21:05 +05'30'