URS Fair has already been audited and no objection in the audit was found. He admitted that Exhibits 22 and 23, are the approval list of the department on the basis of which material was purchased. DW-1 also admitted that Exhibits 25 to 31, are lists of purchased material in the 786th URS Fair, which is signed by three persons and rates mentioned therein are approved by the department. Thus, it stands clear that plaintiff has given his full defence/explanation to such charge. Otherwise such charge is highly belated and once it has come on record that expenditure was audited, where no fault found, the department-prosecution is estopped to level and open such charge. There is no discussion about explanation and documents referred by plaintiff in the Inquiry Report and it is clear that the plaintiff was neither provided copies of documents nor documents prayed to be called for, were summoned, though same are part of record of the department. Plaintiff also submitted that GF & Ar Rules were not applicable in the year 1998 and as per document, Ex-24, order dated 08.12.1998, GF & AR were made applicable, therefore, prior to 08.12.1998, no GF & AR Rules were applicable. No heed was paid on such defence and charge No.2 has been wrongly held proved. 23.3 Third charge, levelled against plaintiff, was that plaintiff unauthorizedly deputed Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta for Reorientation Course on 03.12.2001, and managed his railway concession.
