Law: Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006

Section: 4,5,16(2)(d)

(a)    Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006)-------Ss.4, 5 & 16(2)(d)---Inquiry proceedings---Lesser punishment imposed after first inquiry---De-novo inquiry on same set of allegations---Major penalty of removal from service---Double jeopardy---Principle---Scope---Present matter raised an intriguing question of whether the competent authority, which initially disagreed with the recommendation of removal from service proposed by the inquiry officer and imposed a lesser penalty of demotion, could later on, upon remand of the matter by the appellate authority and after holding de-novo inquiry, inflict a major penalty of removal from service---Facts in brevity were that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under the Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006 (the "PEEDA Act, 2006") on charges of non-accomplishment of official assignments---Initially, the inquiry officer recommended removal from service, but the competent authority imposed a lesser penalty of demotion---In appeal, the appellate authority remanded the matter for a de-novo inquiry due to procedural lapses---After fresh inquiry, the competent authority imposed the major penalty of removal from service---Held: It was not a case where the earlier penalty was deemed inadequate, rather, the procedure adopted by the respondent-department was considered improper, requiring rectification---Therefore, the fresh inquiry was meant to validate the procedural fairness and not to reconsider the proportionality of the punishment--By imposing a harsher penalty (removal from service), the competent authority acted in an unfair and unjust manner---Once the competent authority, in its wisdom, imposed a lesser penalty (demotion), the petitioner had a legitimate expectation that the disciplinary matter was conclusively determined to the extent of quantum of punishment---Moreover, as per the principle of proportionality in service law the punishment must have corresponded to the gravity of the misconduct---The competent authority, in the first instance, determined that demotion was an appropriate response…