If the charges levelled against the Appellant are one of purchase from an unauthorised/non-existent dealer and the finding of the Enquiry Officer is that no such purchase was made, we do not see how the disciplinary authority could have held the charges to have been proved. In any event, if the disciplinary proceedings was vitiated, as held by the Division Bench, we do not see how charge No. 11 could have been held to be proved and that too on the basis of the stand taken by the Appellant in the disciplinary enquiry. Viewed from any perspective, the conclusion with regard to guilt on any of the charges levelled is not sustainable. Both the conclusions i.e. the disciplinary authority as well as the Division Bench of the High Court suffer from inherent contradictions though for different reasons, as indicated above. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Division Bench and the punishment imposed and direct that all reliefs as due in law be now afforded to the Appellant without any delay and in any case within three months from today.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.A. No. 13684 of 2015 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 10607/2014)
Decided On: 24.11.2015
K.P. Gupta Vs. University of Delhi
Coram:Ranjan Gogoi and N.V. Ramana, JJ.
Citation:(2015) 16 SCC 525
