therefore, the appellant is entitled for quashing the order of punishment imposed against her. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the charge against the appellant is that she had contravened the guidelines issued by the Government in implementing the Rogi Kalyan Samidhi (Patient Welfare Society) scheme whereby she had obtained quotations directly or instructed to obtain quotations directly from the companies for purchase of unapproved items. However, the fact remains that the appellant had not obtained quotations, as alleged. Further, it is not her duty to obtain quotation. The appellant, as an implementing authority allotted the funds to the Primary Health Centres and it was the respective Block Medical Officers, who have utilised the funds allotted from the Mission Director and purchased the items. There was no evidence made available to show that the appellant had obtained any quotation from any of the suppliers or purchased the items at her own whims and fancy. Even assuming without admitting that the appellant had colluded with the Medical Officers and caused wrongful loss to the exchequer, then the Medical Officers concerned also ought to have been subjected to disciplinary proceedings. However, the appellant was selectively victimised by the second respondent and proceeded only against her with the departmental proceedings. Further, for the alleged occurrence that had taken place in the year 2007, the charge memo was issued in the year 2011, enquiry officer was appointed in the year 2012 and the enquiry was concluded only on 24.06.2016. Even after conclusion of the enquiry, the final order in the disciplinary proceeding was passed only on 08.02.2018. Such a prolonged disciplinary proceedings conducted against the appellant had prejudiced her and therefore, on the ground of delay also, the order passed by the second respondent imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment has to be set aside.
