SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has set aside a 2023 judgment of a single judge that had quashed disciplinary proceedings against a retired store officer of the Lower Jehlum Hydel Project (LJHP) accused in a copper embezzlement case, ruling that the government may proceed with an inquiry limited to recovery of losses.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Shahzad Azeem and Justice Sindhu Sharma delivered the verdict on Tuesday while allowing Letters Patent Appeal No. 197 of 2023 filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and senior officials of the Power Development Department and Jammu and Kashmir State Power Development Corporation.
The case concerned Aftab Ahmad Malik, a former store officer at LJHP, Baramulla, who along with others was accused of negligence in connection with the disappearance of copper bars from the project’s store in 2012. An FIR was registered at Police Station Boniyar the same year under Section 380 of the Ranbir Penal Code, later altered to Section 409 RPC. Malik and other employees were suspended, and multiple departmental committees were formed to investigate.
Although a Judicial Magistrate at Boniyar discharged Malik and two co-accused in June 2016 due to insufficient evidence and defective investigation, the corporation continued internal proceedings. Malik retired on 31 July 2017 but maintained that no valid inquiry could be pursued against him post-retirement. In June 2023, the writ court sided with him, quashed the order of inquiry, and directed release of his withheld retiral benefits.
The Division Bench, however, observed that a formal charge sheet containing “Articles of Charges” and “Statement of Imputation” had been served upon Malik on 4 March 2013, well before his retirement, thereby instituting departmental proceedings within the meaning of Article 168-A of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service Regulations, 1956.
The court ruled that while penalties under Rule 30 of the 1956 Rules cannot be imposed on retired employees, Article 168-A empowers the government to conduct proceedings solely to determine losses caused to the exchequer due to negligence or fraud, recoverable from pensionary benefits.
The Bench clarified that the departmental inquiry may continue only to assess the alleged Rs 57.72 lakh loss but cannot result in major penalties such as dismissal or removal. Until the inquiry concludes, Malik will remain entitled to provisional pensionary benefits under Article 168-D.
The judges further held that acquittal or discharge in a criminal case does not bar the government from instituting departmental proceedings on the same charges, citing Supreme Court precedents.
Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the single judge’s order of 16 June 2023 was set aside, and Malik’s writ petition dismissed. The court directed that writ records be returned with due diligence.
