STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: In a recent legal judgment, Justice Rajnesh Oswal of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the termination of Ghulam Ahmed Malik, a Cashier employed in the office of Depot Manager, Kupwara. The decision followed allegations of misappropriation of funds, necessitating reconciliation of accounts for the period between 2002 and 2006, which revealed substantial misappropriation by the petitioner, amounting to Rs. 25,58,786.
The modus operandi adopted by the petitioner involved depositing a lesser amount of revenue in the bank account while tampering with the counter-folio of the bank receipt to correspond with the revenue reflected in the Corporation’s books. As a result, the petitioner was placed under suspension pending an inquiry, which began with a preliminary investigation. In light of a prima facie case of embezzlement, the petitioner was formally charged on April 21, 2008. Despite multiple notices sent to the petitioner and published in local newspapers, requesting his participation in the inquiry proceedings to establish his innocence, he chose not to participate. Consequently, the departmental inquiry culminated in a detailed report, confirming the petitioner’s guilt in embezzling Rs. 25,58,786. Subsequently, the petitioner’s services were terminated.
The respondents argued that the termination order was issued in strict adherence to the rules governing the petitioner’s employment with the Corporation, and they ensured the observance of the rules of natural justice throughout the process. The respondents stated that despite the opportunity provided to the petitioner, he did not partake in the inquiry proceedings.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal, after considering both sides, concluded that the petitioner had not participated in the inquiry proceedings despite repeated notices and ample opportunities. The court found no procedural infraction on the part of the respondents in terminating the petitioner’s services. It was further noted that the rules of the Corporation did not require providing the petitioner with an opportunity for a hearing before imposing a major penalty. The court referenced the judgment of the Apex Court in National Fertilizers Ltd. v. P.K. Khanna, which established that no further opportunity for showing cause was necessary after a finding of guilt regarding the quantum of punishment.
In light of the above, the court dismissed the writ petition, finding no merit in the petitioner’s claims.
