The preliminary enquiry had been companyducted by Shri G. S. Srivastava, Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Meerut.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 17 11 1969 of the Allahabad High Court in First Appeal No.
He also companyplained of failure to give him opportunity to produce nine witnesses in his defence with some documents.
That first charge was that the appellant had entered into partnership with others, under the name of Gautam Cycle Mart, Meerut, in 1939, in companytravention of the Government Servants Conduct Rules.
There are, however, suggestions that Shri G. S. Srivastava and Shri R. N. Srivastava, Inspecting Assistant Commissioners, were pursuing the appellant for some unknown reason which we do number find stated anywhere.
It is evident that the questions raised by the appellant depended on findings of fact.
Gobind Das, P. P. Rao, Girish Chandra and S. P. Nayar for the respondents.
The appellants defences included alleged companyfused nature of charges characterized by him as vague, over lapping, intermingled and wrongly joined together.
One of his defences was that a fresh enquiry into the same charges was number permissible under the Departmental rules and was also barred by rules of natural justice.
C. Manchanda, Sadhu Singh, R. N. Kapoor, Mrs. Nirmala Gupta, Uzzal Singh and J. M. Khanna for the appellant.
The appellant was originally appointed on 22nd November 1922, as Lower Division Clerk, and, thereafter, promoted as Income tax Inspector in 1942.
He also pleaded that there had been an enquiry in 1949, by Shri A. Sachdeva, Asstt.
His case was that he had worked to the entire satisfaction of his immediate superior officers and higher authorities and had earned a number of certificates highly appreciative of his work.
It appears that the appellant was in service upto 30th April 1958, when he was prematurely retired.
The appellant also claimed Rs.
He was, however, placed under suspension on 30th September, 1953, by the Commissioner of Income Tax, U.P., Lucknow, on the basis of a preliminary enquiry on allegations involving companyruption and violation of service rules.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BEG, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court given by it on 17th November, 1969, dismissing a plaintiffs first appeal arising out of an original suit for a declaration that the order passed by the Commissioner of Income tax, Lucknow, on 2nd April, 1956, reducing the appellant in rank from the post of an Income tax Officer to that of an Income tax Inspector, was void and inoperative.
His high standard of living and expenditure were also mentioned there.
He was promoted to the post of Income tax Officer in 1945.
16,561.29.
Inspecting Commissioner, into some of the matters mentioned in the charges, and about others in 1952 by Shri R. N. Srivastava, another Inspecting Commissioner, and that the appellant had been exonerated of the allegations and imputations made against him on each occasion.
He was companyfirmed early in 1952 as an Income tax Officer.
The third and the last charge gave particulars of thirteen assessment cases in which the appellant was alleged to be either grossly negligent, careless, inefficient, and or companyrupt in the performance of his duties as Income tax Officer.
The second charge was that he had made various investments in the name of various members of his family far in excess of and disproportionate to the known sources of his income.
Charges were framed on 30th December, 1953, by Shri A. K. Bose, Deputy Director of Investigations, who was appointed by the Commissioner of Income tax as the Inquiring Officer.
20,904/ as arrears of salary, but he reduced this claim to Rs.
1155 of 1971.
178/61 .
All relevant facts had been examined by the officer who held the enquiry and by the punishing authority.
