VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION -
366
735
necessary action to dispatch the charge sheet to the employee to
inform him of the charges framed against him requiring his
explanation; and not also the further fact of service of the charge
sheet on the employee. It is so, because knowledge to the employee
of the charges framed against him, on the basis of the decision taken
to initiate disciplinary proceedings, does not form a part of the decision
making process of the authorities to initiate the disciplinary
proceedings, even if framing the charges forms a part of that process
in certain situations.
(366)
Misconduct — prior to entry in service
Dismissal from service on ground of conviction for
an offence involving moral turpitude prior to entry
into service, even belatedly 15 years thereafter, held
proper.
Jamal Ahmed Qureshi vs. Municipal Council, Katangi,
1993 (3) SLR SC 15
Appellant, an employee of Municipal Council, Katangi, was
convicted for an offence under sec. 377 IPC (carnal intercourse
against order of nature) and sentenced to one and a half years R.I.,
before he joined the service on 24.2.67. His conviction was brought
to the notice of the employer on 15.9.71 and subsequently by the
report of a police officer on 1.4.74 but no action was taken and he
was dismissed from service later on receipt of a further complaint on
2.3.82. Supreme Court rejected the contention of the appellant that
it must be construed that the employer elected to continue the
appellant in service by waiving or condoning the appellant’s
misconduct and hence he cannot go back upon his election and claim
a right to dismiss him in respect of the offence condoned.
Supreme Court observed that as pointed out by the High
Court, the magnitude of the crime involving the moral turpitude of a
very low order, does not warrant any interference with the judgment
of the High Court. As per the Rules, no candidate should be employed