Dalu Ram Meena vs Central Excise & Customs

1 OA No.415/2017
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.415 OF 2017

th
Dated this Tuesday, the 13 day of October, 2026

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. RANJANA SHAHI, MEMBER (J)
HON’BLE MR. LOK RANJAN, MEMBER (A)

Dalu Ram Meena S/o Shri Chhotu Lal Meena,
Aged around 60 years,
R/o 65, Badaguha, Check Post Bassi, District Jaipur.
Earlier working as Assistant Commissioner,
Central Excise, Commissionerate, Jaipur. - Applicant

(By Advocate Shri Amit Mathur)

Versus

1. Union of India through its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance, Department Revenue,
North Block, New Delhi.

2. The Chairman,
Central Board of Excise & Customs,
Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue,
North Block, New Delhi. - Respondents

(By Advocate Shri Kinshuk Jain)

Reserved on 28.09.2026
Pronounced on 13.10.2026

ORDER
Per: Ms. Ranjana Shahi, Member (J)

The applicant, who was working as Assistant
Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax Commissionerate,
Jaipur, was due to superannuate on 30.04.2017. However, since
29.04.2017 and 30.04.2017 were Saturday and Sunday,
respectively, the applicant was relieved on 28.04.2017 (Friday).
The respondents issued a charge-sheet on 28.04.2017, which
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=central administrative
tribunal, PostalCode=302001, L=Jaipur, S=Rajasthan, STREET="
Sahakar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan", OID.2.5.4.65=f9c6978f22a7c6d, Phone=
c9127d0032386c6ff6f2dc108496f05e732619225ac1f8243ae98c53d99f7
ec4, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c6 39, [email protected], CN=KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA
Reason: I am the author of this document
Date: 2026.10.19 11:11:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Page 1 of 8

KHUSHBOO
MITTAL GUPTA

2 OA No.415/2017
was delivered at the residence of the applicant on 01.05.2017
(Monday). The applicant has challenged the same, alleging that
although the charge memo bears the date as 28.04.2017, but it
was actually prepared only on 29.04.2017. He has also stated
that the charges pertain to the period 2013-2014, whereas, he
had narrated the details of the incident in his APAR while writing
his self-appraisal, and thereafter, the Reporting, Reviewing and
Accepting Authorities had graded him as ‘outstanding’.
2. The main ground taken by the applicant is that since
the charge memo was received by him only on 01.05.2017, and
he had already retired on 28.04.2017, the said charge memo is
liable to be set aside because the same had been issued under
Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and
Appeal) Rules, 1965 [for short ‘CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 ’]. The
applicant contends that an enquiry under the said provision can
be conducted only against a Government servant, whereas, on
01.05.2017 when the charge memorandum was received by him,
he was no longer a Government servant and, after retirement, a
memorandum could only be issued under Rule 9 of the Central
Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 [for short ‘ CCS (Pension)
Rules, 1972 ’].
3. The respondents, in their reply, have stated that Sub
Rule (6) of Rule 9 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 provides
that departmental proceedings will be deemed to have been
instituted on the date on which the statement of charges is
issued to the Government servant. In the instant case, the
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=central administrative
tribunal, PostalCode=302001, L=Jaipur, S=Rajasthan, STREET="
Sahakar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan", OID.2.5.4.65=f9c6978f22a7c6d, Phone=
c9127d0032386c6ff6f2dc108496f05e732619225ac1f8243ae98c53d99f7
ec4, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c6 39, [email protected], CN=KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA
Reason: I am the author of this document
Date: 2026.10.19 11:11:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Page 2 of 8

KHUSHBOO
MITTAL GUPTA

3 OA No.415/2017
charge-sheet was issued on 28.04.2017 when the applicant was
in service, therefore, there was no requirement of sanction of the
President of India for initiation of the proceedings. Further, Rule
9(2)(a) of CCS (Pension) Rules 1972 provides that such
departmental proceedings, if instituted while the Government
Servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during
his re-employment, shall, after the final retirement of the
Government servant, be deemed to be proceedings under this
rule and shall be continued and concluded by the authority by
which they were commenced, in the same manner as if the
Government servant had continued in service, provided that
where the departmental proceedings are instituted by the
authority subordinate to the President, that authority shall submit
a report recording its findings to the President.
4. In terms of the above provision, after the retirement of
the officer, as the proceedings are deemed to be proceedings
under Rule 9 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, there is no
requirement for issue of a formal order by the President for
continuation of the proceedings initiated by the Original
Disciplinary Authority under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Further,
the proceedings are to be continued and concluded in the same
manner as if the Government servant had continued in service,
by the authority who commenced the proceedings.
5. Heard both the learned counsels for the parties and
perused the pleadings, documents and materials placed on
record.
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=central administrative
tribunal, PostalCode=302001, L=Jaipur, S=Rajasthan, STREET="
Sahakar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan", OID.2.5.4.65=f9c6978f22a7c6d, Phone=
c9127d0032386c6ff6f2dc108496f05e732619225ac1f8243ae98c53d99f7
ec4, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c6 39, [email protected], CN=KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA
Reason: I am the author of this document
Date: 2026.10.19 11:11:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Page 3 of 8

KHUSHBOO
MITTAL GUPTA

4 OA No.415/2017
6. Since the applicant has approached this Tribunal at
the stage of charge-sheet, the scope of interference is very
limited. At this stage, we cannot go into the merits of the
charges and shall confine ourselves only to considering the
validity of the charge-sheet on the question as to whether the
charge memorandum could have been issued under Rule 14 of
the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, or could have been issued only
under Rule 9 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, since the
charge memorandum was actually received by the applicant on
01.05.2017, whereas, the date of his superannuation was
30.04.2017 i.e. one day prior, since 29.04.2017 and 30.04.2017
were Saturday and Sunday, respectively, he was relieved from
service on Friday i.e. 28.04.2017.
7. We will, therefore, peruse Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA)
Rules, 1965 under which the charge memorandum was issued,
as well as also Rule 9 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, which
the applicant claims to be applicable to him. We shall first
examine the relevant provisions of Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA)
Rules, 1965, under which the charge memorandum was issued,
which are reproduced hereunder:
“14. Procedure for imposing major penalties
…..
(4)(a) . The disciplinary authority shall deliver or cause to be
delivered to the Government servant a copy of the articles
of charge, the statement of the imputations of misconduct or
misbehaviour and a list of documents and witnesses by
which each article of charges is proposed to be sustained.”


The relevant provisions of Rule 9(2)(a) of the CCS
(Pension) Rules, 1972, which the applicant claims to be
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=central administrative
tribunal, PostalCode=302001, L=Jaipur, S=Rajasthan, STREET="
Sahakar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan", OID.2.5.4.65=f9c6978f22a7c6d, Phone=
c9127d0032386c6ff6f2dc108496f05e732619225ac1f8243ae98c53d99f7
ec4, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c6 39, [email protected], CN=KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA
Reason: I am the author of this document
Date: 2026.10.19 11:11:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Page 4 of 8

KHUSHBOO
MITTAL GUPTA

5 OA No.415/2017
applicable in the present case, are reproduced hereunder:
“9. Right of President to withhold or withdraw
pension.—
…….
(2)(a). The departmental proceedings referred to in sub-
rule (1), if instituted while the Government servant was in
service whether before his retirement or during his re-
employment, shall, after the final retirement of the
Government servant, be deemed to be proceedings under
this rule and shall be continued and concluded by the
authority by which they were commenced in the same
manner as if the Government servant had continued in
service:
Provided that where the departmental proceedings are
instituted by an authority subordinate to the President, that
authority shall submit a report recording its findings to the
President.”

8. The whole argument of the learned counsel for the
applicant is based upon Rule 14(4)(a), which starts with the
words, “ the disciplinary authority shall deliver or cause to be
delivered to the Government servant a copy of the article of
charge…. ”. The learned counsel for the applicant contends that
“the date / time of delivery is of essence” and that it is only when
the charge memorandum is delivered to the Government
servants that the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 become applicable.
Since the charge memorandum was delivered to the applicant on
01.05.2017, and the applicant had superannuated one day prior
i.e. on 30.04.2017 and relieved on 28.04.2017, he was not a
Government servant at the time of receiving the charge
memorandum.
9. To our mind, Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 is
meant to lay down the procedure to be followed in disciplinary
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=central administrative
tribunal, PostalCode=302001, L=Jaipur, S=Rajasthan, STREET="
Sahakar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan", OID.2.5.4.65=f9c6978f22a7c6d, Phone=
c9127d0032386c6ff6f2dc108496f05e732619225ac1f8243ae98c53d99f7
ec4, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c6 39, [email protected], CN=KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA
Reason: I am the author of this document
Date: 2026.10.19 11:11:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Page 5 of 8

KHUSHBOO
MITTAL GUPTA

6 OA No.415/2017
proceedings and is not intended to stipulate or define the date or
time from which the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 become applicable.
10. The CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 needs to be read in
tandem with Rule 9 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. In fact, Rule
9 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 rather throws light on the
time of institution of the disciplinary proceedings. As is evident
from the above-reproduced extract, Rule 9(2)(a) emphasizes the
institution of the disciplinary proceedings rather than the delivery
of the charge memorandum, as it says “if instituted while the
Government servant was in service”. Further, Rule 9(6)(a) is
specifically reproduced herein-below :-
“9. Right of President to withhold or withdraw
pension.—
(6) For the purpose of this rule –
(a) departmental proceedings shall be deemed to be
instituted on the date on which the statement of charges is
issued to the Government servant or pensioner, or if the
Government servant has been placed under suspension
from an earlier date, on such date; and”

11. As is evident from the above, Rule 9(6)(a) it, in fact,
clarifies what shall be deemed to be “instituted”. It says
“departmental proceedings shall be deemed to be instituted
on the date on which the statement of charge is issued to
the Government servants”. In the present case, the statement
of charges / charge memorandum was issued on 28.04.2017,
while the applicant was still in service and, as such, was a
Government servant. What emerges from the aforesaid
provision and discussion is that the date of institution of the
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=central administrative
tribunal, PostalCode=302001, L=Jaipur, S=Rajasthan, STREET="
Sahakar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan", OID.2.5.4.65=f9c6978f22a7c6d, Phone=
c9127d0032386c6ff6f2dc108496f05e732619225ac1f8243ae98c53d99f7
ec4, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c6 39, [email protected], CN=KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA
Reason: I am the author of this document
Date: 2026.10.19 11:11:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Page 6 of 8

KHUSHBOO
MITTAL GUPTA

7 OA No.415/2017
disciplinary proceedings is crucial, and what is deemed to be
“instituted” is the statement of charges and what is deemed to
be the date of institution is the “issuance” of the statement of
charges. In case the same is done while the Government
servant was in service, the proceedings shall be deemed to be
under Rule 9 and shall continue and be concluded as if the
Government servant had continued in service and in the present
case, the statement of charges was issued on 28.04.2017 and
on that date, the applicant was still in service. As to the
allegation of the applicant that though the date mentioned on the
charge memo was 28.04.2017 but it was actually prepared on
29.04.2017, is simply on allegation without furthering any
evidence to support it, even otherwise also not believable as
29.04.2017 was a holiday being Saturday.
12. We find support for our view in the judgment dated
07.04.1993 passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Delhi Development Authority Vs. H.C.Khurana, reported in
(1993) 3 SCC 196. The relevant extract of the same is
reproduced below :
“Decision to initiate the disciplinary proceedings against
the respondent had been taken and charge sheet had also
been issued to the respondent prior to Nov. 28, 1990 when
the DPC adopted the sealed cover procedure. It cannot be
held otherwise merely because service of the charge-sheet
framed and issued earlier could be effected on the
respondent after November 28, 1990, on account of his
absence. (Para 16)
The meaning of the word 'issued' has to be gathered from
the context in which it is used. The decision to initiate
disciplinary proceedings cannot be subsequent to the
issuance of the charge-sheet, since issue of the charge-
sheet is a consequence of the decision to initiate
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=central administrative
tribunal, PostalCode=302001, L=Jaipur, S=Rajasthan, STREET="
Sahakar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan", OID.2.5.4.65=f9c6978f22a7c6d, Phone=
c9127d0032386c6ff6f2dc108496f05e732619225ac1f8243ae98c53d99f7
ec4, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c6 39, [email protected], CN=KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA
Reason: I am the author of this document
Date: 2026.10.19 11:11:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Page 7 of 8

KHUSHBOO
MITTAL GUPTA

8 OA No.415/2017
disciplinary proceedings. The service of the charge-sheet
on the government servant follows the decision to initiate
disciplinary proceedings, and it does not precede or
coincide with that decision. The delay, if any, in service of
the charge-sheet to the government servant, after it has
been framed and despatched, does not have the effect of
delaying initiation of the disciplinary proceedings,
inasmuch as information to the government servant of the
charges framed against him, by service of the charge-
sheet, is not a part of the decision making process of the
authorities for initiating the disciplinary proceedings. The
contrary view would defeat the object by enabling the
government servant, if so inclined, to evade service and
thereby frustrate the decision and get promotion in spite of
that decision. (Paras 15, 9 and 13)”.

13. The allegation of the applicant that, though the date
mentioned on the charge memorandum is 28.04.2017, but the
same was actually issued on 29.04.2017 is an unfounded
assertion, as he has not supported the same at all.
14 . Hence, in the light of above, we do not find any
infirmity in the impugned charge-sheet dated 28.04.2017.
Accordingly, the present Original Application is dismissed being
devoid of merits.
15 . Pending MAs, if any, stand closed.


(Lok Ranjan) (Ranjana Shahi)
Member (A) Member (J)


kmg*
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=central administrative
tribunal, PostalCode=302001, L=Jaipur, S=Rajasthan, STREET="
Sahakar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan", OID.2.5.4.65=f9c6978f22a7c6d, Phone=
c9127d0032386c6ff6f2dc108496f05e732619225ac1f8243ae98c53d99f7
ec4, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c6 39, [email protected], CN=KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA
Reason: I am the author of this document
Date: 2026.10.19 11:11:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Page 8 of 8

KHUSHBOO
MITTAL GUPTA