The respondent was transferred on January 14, 1993 to the Secretariat and was kept in charge of Recovery Cell.
The appointing authority companysidered the record and found necessary to take disciplinary proceedings for those financial irregularities and misappropriation companymitted during that period and action was in companytemplation against the respondent.
On September 3, 1993, the vigilance companyducted a raid on the house of the respondent and found him to be in possession of disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs 11.44 lakhs.
Subsequently, the appellant received information that the respondent was in possession of disproportionate assets to the known lawful sources and directed the vigilance to companyduct an investigation.
It sought to serve the order of suspension on the respondent on September 28, 1993 and September 29, 1993 but the respondent avoided the receipt of it.
On March 17, 1993 they passed an order directing an inquiry into the irregularities and also decided to keep him under suspension pending further action.
Thus, these appeals by special leave.
So it was sent by registered post to the residential address, as well as personally served on the respondent by the Under Secretary at 4.00 p.m. on September 30, 1993.
46 under Section 3 2 read with Section 13 1 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and further investigation was on.
Anticipating this action, the respondent attempted to pre empt it and laid O.A. No.
2493 of 1993 arising out of O.A. No.
immediately, the Tribunal suspended the order on the same day, namely, on September 30, 1993 in M.P. No.
Thereafter certain other financial irregularities relating to purchase of woollen carpets etc.
Accordingly, the crime was registered in Crime No.
apart from suppression of audit objections had companye to light.
396 of 1993 in the State Administrative Tribunal, Bhubneswar and prayed to quash Government memorandums dated January 14, 1993 and February 11, 1993 and also filed an application for ad interim injunction.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAMASWAMY, J. Delay of II 8 days is companydoned.
On companysideration of the material, the Government by order dated September 28, 1993 suspended the respondent from service.
Special leave granted.
While the respondent was working as Manager of Orissa State Guest House at Bhubneswar, the Government Audit Department audited the accounts for the periods from 1984 85 to 1990 91 and numbered serious financial irregularities, fabrication of records and vouchers and misappropriation to the tune of Rs 163.59 lakhs.
There were audit reports for the years 1978 79 to 1980 81 also which appear to have pointed out similar objections.
On the other hand the Tribunal appears to have found fault with the action taken by the appellant.
Hardly the ink on the order of suspension dried on the paper, the Tribunal on the same day, namely March 17, 1993 directed number to suspend the respondent and also directed the standing companynsel to obtain instructions of the need to suspend the respondent.
1594 of 1993 and obviously after 4.00 p.m. In the first order though the Tribunal directed to obtain prior permission before passing any suspension order and despite filing of application for permission, without disposing of the same, the matter was being adjourned from time to time and ultimately the cases were posted for final disposal.
Neither permission was granted number matters were disposed of.
