Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

S. Manickam Versus The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, The Accountant General (A&E) Office of the Account General & The District Treasury Officer,

Decrease in pension of petitioner - The allegation made under the charge is that during the year 2004-2005, he had issued seven Transit Passes to a registered dealer M/s. VNMAD Firm, to a total value of ₹ 15,08,250/- for the interstate movement of goods on consignment sales to the Pondicherry Union State and thereby facilitated the trader to evade sales tax at the rate of 4% and that by the above said act, he has failed to maintain integrity, devotion to duty and thus violated Rule 21 of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Accountant General for sanctioning of pension and other pensionery benefits, after the retirement of the petitioner for the grant of pension. However, after a period of two years, the first respondent issued a charge memo dated 01.07.2008 under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, containing two charges. The allegation made against the petitioner was that he issued 7 false transit passes to one trader which enabled the said trader to create false records t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ultation was made with the TNPSC before passing the impugned order. Admittedly, a notice was issued calling upon the petitioner to show-cause about the proposed punishment. He replied thereby not agreeing with such proposed punishment. As per the proviso to Rule 9(1)(a), the respondent ought to have taken view of the TNPSC. In this case, it has not been done and on the other hand, the first respondent has passed the impugned order only, on the reason that this Court has directed the first respon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AABU J. For the Appellant : Mr.M.Ganesan For the Respondent : Mr.R.Anandaraj ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved against the final order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings dated 07.05.2014. Consequently, he is seeking a direction to the second and third respondents to allow him to receive full pension. Through the impugned order, the petitioner was awarded the punishment of cut in pension at the rate of ₹ 1,000/- per month for a period of three years. 2. The case of the petiti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

alue of ₹ 15,08,250/- for the interstate movement of goods on consignment sales to the Pondicherry Union State and thereby facilitated the trader to evade sales tax at the rate of 4% and that by the above said act, he has failed to maintain integrity, devotion to duty and thus violated Rule 21 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rule, 1973. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 17.02.2009. After lapse of 3 years, the first respondent appointed an Enquiry Officer to conduct .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ointed out any pecuniary loss caused to the Government. The petitioner has submitted his explanation on 05.04.2013. However, the final order is passed, which is impugned in this writ petition as stated supra. 3. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is stated as follows:- The writ petitioner and one Thiru M.Omur Mohideen, CTO-III, have issued 24 false transit passes to VNMAD Firm of Thoothukudi to facilitate the said trader to create false records, as if pulses to the total .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ge memo was issued on 01.07.2008. An enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 27.01.2012. After examining the report of the Enquiry Officer, it was decided to disagree with the finding of the Enquiry Officer. Hence, through communication dated 28.02.2012, the petitioner was informed of the reasons for such disagreement. Further, explanations were called for from the petitioner, who in turn, submitted his representation on 05.04.2013. The writ petitioner has not accep .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he first respondent to pass final order on the disciplinary proceedings within a period of 30 days. As per the said order passed by this Court, it has been decided to hold both the charges as proved and consequently, the impugned order has been passed by the competent authority. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order passed is in violation of Rules 9(1)(a), 2(a) and 2(b) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. He further pointed out that there is no specific fin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

India), (1999)7 SCC 409 (Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar vs. Union of India and others) and unreported decision of this Court made in W.A(MD)No.171/2012 dated 13.03.2012. 5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents supported the impugned order and submitted that the same was passed in accordance with law, as the petitioner has facilitated the trader to evade sales tax to a sum of ₹ 60,330/- by issuing four transit passes to the value of ₹ 15,08,350/- . The .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ial Tax Officer and retired from service on attaining age of superannuation on 31.05.2006. It is stated by the petitioner and not disputed by the respondents that till his retirement, there were no adverse remarks and any other proceedings initiated or pending against him. It is also seen that the first respondent has forwarded the pension papers of the petitioner to the Accountant General for sanctioning of pension and other pensionery benefits, after the retirement of the petitioner for the gr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. It is seen that the Enquiry Officer after conducting the enquiry, filed a report on 27.01.2012, holding that the charges levelled against the petitioner as 'not proved'. The disciplinary authority differed with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and issued show-cause notice dated 28.02.2012 under Rule 9(2)(b)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. The reason for disagreement on the findings of the Enquiry Officer is that the charged officer has issued the transit passes with incorrect na .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

transit pass is not the conclusive proof to decide whether the goods consigned have been sold within the State without being moved to Pondicherry. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority not being satisfied with the said explanation, proposed to impose a punishment of cut in pension of ₹ 1000/- per months for a period of three years. Such proposal was communicated to the petitioner through proceedings dated 04.07.2013 and he was called upon to offer his objection as against the proposed pun .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

specified period if, in any departmental or judicial proceeding, the petitioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence during the period of his service, including service rendered upon re-employment after retirement, and such withholding or withdrawing the pension may be effected irrespective of the fact whether or not any pecuniary loss on account of such grave misconduct or negligence was caused to the Government, to any local body or to any co-operative society comprising of gover .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he pension may be effected, irrespective of the fact whether or not any pecuniary loss on account of such misconduct was caused to the Government. Therefore, the petitioner is not justified in contending that there is no finding with regard to pecuniary loss caused to the Government. However, reading of proviso to sub-rule (1)(a) of Rule 9 would show that if the petitioner does not agree to such withholding or withdrawing of the pension and before passing an order under the said Rule, the Tamil .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r Rule 9(1)(a), the Government has reserved to it the right of withholding or withdrawing a pension or part thereof, whether permanently or for a specified period if, in any departmental or judicial proceeding, the pensioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence during the period of his service. It is also applicable in respect of service rendered upon re-employment after retirement. The Government can withhold or withdraw the pension irrespective of the fact whether any pecuniary lo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ovides that if any pecuniary loss has been caused to the Government and in any departmental or judicial proceedings, the pensioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence during the period of his service, including the service rendered upon re-employment after retirement, then the Government shall have the right of ordering recovery of the whole or part of the pecuniary loss caused by such grave misconduct or negligence from the pension or Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity. However, this c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Rule 9(1)(a) is to be held as vitiated. 13. In this case, it is seen that no such consultation was made with the TNPSC before passing the impugned order. Admittedly, a notice was issued calling upon the petitioner to show-cause about the proposed punishment. He replied thereby not agreeing with such proposed punishment. As per the proviso to Rule 9(1)(a), the respondent ought to have taken view of the TNPSC. In this case, it has not been done and on the other hand, the first respondent has pass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

learned counsel for the petitioner relied a decision reported in (1997)7 SCC 409 (cited supra) wherein at paragraphs 42 and 43, it is held as follows: ?42. Initiation of disciplinary proceedings against an officer cannot take place on information which is vague or indefinite. Suspicion has no role to play in such matter. There must exist reasonable basis for the disciplinary authority to proceed against the delinquent officer. Merely because penalty was not imposed and the Board in the exercise .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

an error of law, the charge-sheet on the face of it does not proceed on any legal premise rendering it liable to be quashed. In other words, to maintain any charge-sheet against quasi- judicial authority something more has to be alleged than a mere mistake of law, e.g. in the nature of some extraneous consideration influencing the quasi-judicial order. Since nothing of the sort is alleged herein the impugned charge-sheet is rendered illegal. The charge-sheet, if sustained, will thus impinge upon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ears that the charge levelled against the petitioner cannot be sustained for the following reasons: It is not in dispute that the petitioner was only an Issuing Authority to issue the transit passes. Therefore, if the goods were moved without transit passes or with false transit passes, as if the goods were moved from Tamil Nadu to Pandicherry, then, the Assessing Authority ought to have proceeded against the registered dealer by issuing show-cause notice and making an order of assessment accord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Update Alerts     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version