Transfer Application No. 111/2010 (Arising out of W.P (C) No. 10343/08). Case: Bikash Krushna Mohanti S/o Late Raikrushna Mohanti Vs Union of India (UOI) represented by its Secretary in the Ministry of Defence, Chief of Army Staff, General Officer Commanding-in- Chief and Commandant, Command Hospital. Armed Forces Tribunal
| Case Number | Transfer Application No. 111/2010 (Arising out of W.P (C) No. 10343/08) |
| Judges | S.K. Gupta, J. (Member (J)) and K.P.D. Samanta, Member (A) |
| Issue | Service Law |
| Judgement Date | May 10, 2011 |
| Court | Armed Forces Tribunal |
Order:
K.P.D. Samanta, Member (A), (Kolkata Bench)
-
The Petitioner, Bikas Krushna Mohanti is a retired Major General from the Army Medical Corps. He was posted as Senior Registrar of Command Hospital, Eastern Command (for short 'CHEC') with effect from January, 2000 in the rank of Colonel. He subsequently, was promoted to the rank of Brigadier and then to Major General and was awarded 'Ati Vishisht Seva Medal'. He retired on 30th September, 2006 in the rank of Major General.
-
During his tenure in the Command Hospital CHEC, the Petitioner was proceeded against through a court of inquiry for causing irregular investment with one Mr. Vinod Juthani of M/s Ridhi-Sidhi Consultant, from Regimental Fund accounts of 'CHEC' pertaining to the period from January 1999 to June 2003. It was an action contrary to the instructions contained in Paragraph 829 of Regulations of Army, 1987 and other relevant instructions (Annexure 1 of the Writ petition). The Petitioner along with others was proportionately blamed for such irregular investment that totaled up to more than Rs. 22 lakhs. Subsequent to the directions of the General Officer Commanding in Chief (GOC in C) Eastern Command (Respondent No. 3) based on the above Court of Inquiry on the subject, the Petitioner was issued with a show-cause notice on 3rd February, 2005 for committing lapses resulting in financial irregularities, while posted as the Senior Registrar of 'CHEC' during the period from January 2000 to January 2001, resulting in irregular investments, wrong entries in cash ledger, non-reporting of such irregularities and inadequate exercise of Command and Control (Annexure 1). This show-cause notice was replied by the Petitioner on 23rd February, 2005 (Annexure -4). Having considered his reply, the GOC-in-C, exercising his administrative powers, awarded "Severe Displeasure (non-recordable)" to the Petitioner on 19th April, 2005 (Annexure P-5 of the Writ Petition).
-
The Petitioner has also brought out that in the meantime, i.e., before he was served with a show-cause notice, he had deposited Rs. 3 lakhs as refundable deposit towards the amount of investment made during the financial year 2000- 2001, when he was the Senior Registrar. Such deposit was made in favor of the Regimental Fund Accounts of 'CHEC', Kolkata. On 21st January, 2004 as is evident from the Petitioner's letter dated 21st January 2004 addressed to the Commandant, 'CHEC' (Annexure -2). The Petitioner has enclosed a photocopy of the said bank draft with above annexure to further reiterate that he had deposited such amount with the Regimental Fund of 'CHEC'.
-
The Petitioner at no point of time contested the administrative punishment that was awarded to him for lapses as enumerated in Annexure 1&5. He has, however, represented to the authorities seeking refund of Rs. 3 lakhs vide his representation dated 12th November 2007. This representation dated 12-11-2007 (Annexure -6) by the Petitioner was made only after he retired from service and was addressed to the Commandant of 'CHEC' with a copy endorsed to the GOC-in-C of Eastern Command (Annexure -6). Following points were brought out by him in the said representation:
(a) The Petitioner deposited Rs. 3 lakhs as a 'refundable deposit' and it was in pursuance to discussions held by him with Commandant of 'CHEC' and Chief of Staff, Eastern Command (Lt Gen J R Mukherjee), reportedly on 12th Jan, 2004.
(b) The Petitioner, after having been punished through an administrative action on 10th April, 2005, now considered that the matter should have been closed and he sought for refund of such refundable deposit of Rs. 3 lakhs.
(c) The Petitioner being a retired officer, emphasized that he was in financial need. Therefore, he insisted that the amount paid by him should be returned to him immediately.
-
The ibid letter was replied by the Command Hospital (CHEC) on 28th November, 2009 (Annexure-7). It is stated therein that the authorities had proceeded against the defaulting Private Consultant (Ridhi-Sidhi Consultant) and Shri Vinod Juthani through an official complaint. Cases were pending against the said Consultant; but did not make any commitment with regards to return of the deposit made by the Petitioner. In the Affidavit-in-Opposition (in short 'A/O'), the Respondents have agreed to the factual aspects as mentioned by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial