Seema Rani v. Bhagat Phool Singh Mahila Vishwavidyalaya And Another

-1-

   
   








!

"#$%$ &'

( (

)* 

+(  

,%(

 - )  * - , ),

- 



((() )

*'

.- *( )
 * )-



            

   

 

    ////

* )-0  1-2

1.

   !!"#!!$   %   & setting aside of departmental proceedings initiated against her.

2.

  

              
  '  &  

'

 (     )

The petitioner is working as clerk with respondent No. 1-Bhagat Phool Singh Mahila Vishwavidyalaya Khanpur Kalan, Sonipat. She was assigned job of cashier in 2016 and at that point of time receipts were issued manually. The Authorities detected scam of more than Rs. 40,00,000/-. The respondent initiated an inquiry against suspected persons including petitioner. As

-2per inquiry report dated 31.03.2021 (Annexure P-1A), petitioner-Seema Rani as well as Rakesh Kumar, Ajay Kumar Malik, Ved Prakash Dua and Satish Kumar, apart from many others were responsible for embezzlement and misappropriation of University funds. It was also found that petitioner was major beneficiary of scam along with Financial Officer and Accounts Officer. The conclusion drawn by Inquiry Officer along with his recommendations is reproduced as below:- "CONCLUSION:

In view of above factual position, the following conclusion emerges in the case:

1.

The FO, Shri Rakesh Kumar masterminded the alleged scam in the Accounts Branch of the University and in his said misconduct and misdeamnour, S/Shri Ved Prakash Dua, AO, Ajay Kumar Malik, Computer Assistant and Satish Kumar, Clerk (outsource) colluded and abetted the embezzlement and misappropriation of the University money in its Accounts Branch.

 Smt. Seema Rani, Clerk has been major beneficiary in the scam along with the FO and AO.  Smt. Geeta Rani, Clerk, Shri Jaiteerath, Clerk, Shri Parveen ITI trainee, Smt. Babita, Clerk, Ms. Pooja OMCA trainee and Mrs. Jyoti, Clerk were fully aware about what was happening at the income receipt seat and were actually acting as agents and accomplices of the FO and the AO. During the leave period of Smt. Seema Rani, Clerk, income receipts worth Rs.4,86,415/- have been found cancelled on the system through above officials at the computer system and the said amount is required to be recovered from them and those with whom they connived in the scam.  The amount of Rs. 26 lakh recovered from the proven culprit Smt. Seema Rani, Clerk belongs to the University and she deserves nothing back out of it.

-3RECOMMENDATIONS:

(a) Appropriate legal action may be taken by the University Authorities against the then Finance Officer Shri Rakesh Kumar, Accounts Officer Shri Ved Prakash Dua, Computer Assistant Shri Ajay Kumar Malik, Clerk (outsourced) Shri Satish Kumar and Clerk Smt. Seema Rani on account of their deceitful roles in the alleged scam in the Accounts Branch of the University.

(b) Strict disciplinary action may be initiated against the officials named in para 3 above for their grave misconduct and dubious roles in the scam.

(c) Mrs. Seema Rani, Clerk is unfit for the University job and hence strict disciplinary action may be initiated against her for appropriate action in the context.

(d) The University Authorities, by adopting appropriate means, may try to ascertain and recover the misappropriated / embezzled University money, if any, pertaining to the period starting from the date of installation of the alleged software on the computer system in the Accounts Branch and upto 31.03.2019."

*

The respondent after completing inquiry, served charge-sheet upon the petitioner. She preferred CWP-15742 of 2023 before this Court seeking setting-aside of charge-sheet as well as consequent proceedings. The respondent during the pendency of aforesaid petition withdrew charge-sheet and petitioner opted to withdraw her petition, accordingly this Court vide order dated 06.09.2023, dismissed the petition as withdrawn with liberty to submit reply so that proceedings may be concluded in accordance with law. The order dated 06.09.2023 passed by this Court is produced as below:- + 



  

  

  



  

!

 "

# 

 

-4- $ %







     

 



#  &   



# " #

  

%



#   '

( 

  
)
)

 

&  *  $ $ 

 ))
)


& *+  ,( 

 - 
%$ ,(

   .

 .

 

  ,  

 

,

.(     (   ,   

  (

#   

  $



 ))
)


& *+

#  

(

  


      %





 

,    

   

  ,



     $ 

   

, $  $ .



 - /)   )0)/
)
    1

. (     

    '

( 

  
)
)

       
0)
)
  

%

.



#  

( ,

(%     



#(,

 %





 $ $  2





#

  

  

   

 , 

,(







      #%





 

,    (,   $  $ 

  

 0 3

#

.

$ 

 , 

,(



 

  

%     

     $  $ $   , (

 4 ,

The respondent permitted the petitioner to inspect the record and thereafter supplied requisite documents. The respondent issued fresh show cause notice proposing punishment. The petitioner filed reply to said show cause notice. The matter is pending before Disciplinary Authority for final adjudication. 

-5- "

   ( -'

      

 -(  -'  % '

.

    ' %-' /    -    $

 

  (  0 -'  

    - (  

 (  (  -   0      ''  

%      (      

  

' 3%

  (    

  ( '

  (  !"44444#. (55 (    -'       

 '  '        (       

0 

           

    &   .

          

 

' %-'/

  

     

     ''

7.

%-'    

   '      %-' /   

 (  

           ' 

-6-  '  %-'      '   '    ( '    

  (0 '

  '  '%-'/      ''

   '' (    0 

 6!

3(   (55(8'3       (     (      

   % (  0       (         9 '
        

     '  '    # #  ('

 '  '9 ' '

6)

9( 6*

%(   ' ( '   (  !) 6!

!4!*

3* )-4

( 0

 

: & #  ;#7 :  ;#7