THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.Nos.21312 and 25502 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V.Afzulpurkar) The employee has filed W.P.No.25502 of 2009 and the State has filed W.P.No.21312 of 2009 aggrieved by the order of the A.P.Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.A.No.2823 of 2006, dated 17-06-2009. The employee filed O.A.No.2823 of 2006 against G.O.Rt.No.777, dated 08-03-2006, wherein and whereby the punishment of withholding of entire pension and D.C.R.G. benefits was imposed against the employee in W.P.No.25502 of 2009 besides recovery of an amount of Rs.2,07,643/-. The employee approached the Tribunal questioning the said punishment on the ground that even after enquiry officer’s report, the main charges with regard to misappropriation etc., were held not proved against him and at best only lack of supervision was found against him. The punishment imposed, therefore, being highly disproportionate, the same was questioned before the Tribunal. The State defended the said proceedings on the ground that the employee being the Head of the Office failed to exercise proper care and vigilance and total lack of supervision on the subordinate officers. After considering the contentions of either side, the Tribunal was of the view that the main charge was in fact admitted by the Senior Accounts Officer and was also otherwise proved against him. The said Senior Accounts Officer also gave an undertaking that he alone is responsible for misappropriation and he undertook to reimburse the entire amount. Later, the said Senior Accounts Officer was dismissed from service on 10-08-2005. In view of the aforesaid fact coupled with the fact of failure to supervise was only found against the employee, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that such punishment of withholding of entire pension and D.C.R.G. benefits was highly disproportionate. The Tribunal also noticed that the employee retired on 31-01-1999 and taking all those aspects into consideration had set aside the order of punishment and remitted the matter to the Secretary, Government of A.P., Finance Department, Hyderabad, to review the punishment imposed and pass appropriate orders, within a period four weeks, keeping in view the extent of charges held proved against the employee. We have heard both sides and it is the contention on behalf of the employee that charges, which are held proved against him being not serious, the punishment imposed was rightly found to be disproportionate by the Tribunal. Learned Government Pleader, however, submits that as the Head of the Office, employee is expected to exercise his duties with due caution, care and vigilance and failure to verify and check the accounts resulting in loss to the Government, apart from failure to safeguarding office records as well as safeguarding payments from the Government funds. The punishment, therefore, was justified and Tribunal ought not to have interfered with the same. We have considered the aforesaid submissions. Out of 9 charges, only five charges are said to have been proved against the employee on the basis of the report of the Enquiry Officer and the other four charges, which are more serious in nature, are attributable to the other employee, who has admitted the lapses and agreed to reimburse the entire amount. We are informed that the said amount has already been recovered by the Government. The following charges are held proved against the employee:- 1. He failed to verify whether the pension amounts were claimed in respect of those, who are actually drawing pensions from the Sub-Treasury, Chittoor. 2. He failed in his legitimate duties in safeguarding the office records since previous check register of Military pensioners of Sub-Treasury, Chittoor, is found missing due to which it could not be verified whether there are any more cases of such misappropriation. 3. He failed to attest each entry in the pensions payment register of Military Pensions as required in Article 19 (iii) of A.P.A.C. Vol.II read with in form T.A.33 of APAC Vol.II. 4. He failed to make individual pensioner wise entries in respect of Military Pension while passing claim and thus violated instructions contained in Note under L.R. 4(1) under Art.50.54 as APAC, Vol.II. 5. He failed to check the totallings in the Military Pension Payment Register (a subsidiary register). As per the Enquiry Officer’s finding, only the aforesaid charges are proved against the employee. It has been rightly noticed by the Tribunal that the said charges, which are held proved against the employee, are not in the nature of either misappropriation or other serious lapses and the said charges would point out only failure to exercise proper supervision over the affairs of the office and his subordinates. The Tribunal, therefore, was justified in coming to the conclusion, on the totality of the facts and circumstances, that the punishment of withholding of entire pensionary benefits was unjustified and disproportionate. The said punishment, therefore, was rightly set aside by the Tribunal and we do not see any error on the part of the Tribunal, which warrants correction under our Certiorari jurisdiction, particularly as employee retired in January, 1999. We, therefore, confirm the order of the Tribunal and dismiss both the writ petitions with a direction to the Secretary, Government of A.P., Finance Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, to re-consider the entire matter, in the light of the circumstances including the fact that the employee has retired as early as on 31-01- 1999 and he is deprived of even the provisional pension from the date of the impugned order of punishment i.e., 08-03-2006, and pass appropriate orders, reviewing the punishment as directed by the Tribunal, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event of the 1st respondent failure to pass orders within the time stipulated above, the order of the Tribunal shall remain operative with regard to payment of provisional pension. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Date: 05-12-2009 Note: Issue C.C. in three days (B/o) Prv