NAMDEORAJUL Digitally signed by RAJUL NAMDEODN: C=IN, CN=RAJUL NAMDEO,L=Jabalpur, O=Personal, ST=Madhya Pradesh, E=[email protected], postalCode=482004, serialNumber=ea8eccfd52644dcb30af620f19c18d39662134c765dec84aec2c142b41c6e609, street=3850, Shubhash Nagar Aadhartal, Andhuwa, Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh India 482004, telephoneNumber=e125d5860c1f7a1e0a12bbccc5e950204860d7795912c018822fac86d32130fe, title=9136Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.11 14:01:19+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1 3. submitted that the conduct of the applicant which led to his conviction The respondents have filed their reply wherein it has been was such that his further retention in the public service was felt undesirable as the gravity of the charge warranted imposition of a major penalty. He had requested for sympathetic consideration for not imposing the penalty of dismissal from services. However, the same was rejected and the official has been dismissed by respondent No. 3 vide Hon'ble CITII, Jabalpur's order dated 20.03.2015 (Annexure A-1). The respondents have further submitted that the disciplinary as well as appellate authorities have categorically held that the applicant is being dismissed from service under Rule 19 (1) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. Admittedly, the applicant has been convicted by the Trial Court for offences punishable under Prevention of Corruption Act and Indian Penal Code. Thus, it cannot be stated that the conviction of the applicant by the trial court was technical or of a trivial nature. The fact that the applicant has been convicted by the trial court is a sufficient proof of misconduct on his part.
