05.04.2013 Views

VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

608 DECISION - 291<br />

The department filed an appeal against this order before the<br />

Supreme Court and the Supreme Court set aside the order of the<br />

Division Bench as well as the order of the single Judge. The Supreme<br />

Court held that after the deletion from clause (2) of Art. 311 of<br />

Constitution by the Constitution forty-second Amendment Act, 1976,<br />

the constitutional requirement is satisfied by holding an inquiry in<br />

which the Government servant was informed of the charges against<br />

him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard and referred<br />

to rule 15(4) of the Central Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1965 as<br />

amended, and remitted the writ appeal for disposal on merits.<br />

(Secretary, Central Board of Excise and Customs vs.<br />

K.S.Mahalingam: 1986(3) SLR SC 144)<br />

In the present writ appeal, the High Court examined the<br />

question whether it is always necessary before a charge of failure to<br />

maintain absolute integrity or failure to maintain devotion to duty and<br />

doing something which is unbecoming of a Government servant is<br />

established, passing of money or illegal gratification must be<br />

established. The High Court observed that when the service rule<br />

regulating the conduct of public servant expressly provides that a<br />

Government servant should at all times maintain absolute integrity, it<br />

is obvious that the conduct expected of the Government servant is<br />

one which is upright and honest. In the case of assessment of duty<br />

like the instant one, even assuming for a moment that the assessing<br />

officer does not receive any illegal gratification, if undervaluation of<br />

the articles in respect of which a duty is levied is deliberately and<br />

wilfully done, it cannot be said that the said Government servant has<br />

acted honestly or that his conduct was upright. There may be several<br />

considerations which might induce a public servant to go out of the<br />

way and oblige another person in the matter of assessment to duty.<br />

Even acquaintance with the person who is to be obliged would be<br />

enough consideration for an undervaluation. This undervaluation<br />

would result not because of the anxiety to oblige an acquaintance. It<br />

would be a different matter if the undervaluation of the articles to be

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!