Judgment

HIDAYATULLAH, C.J.I.-The appellant, Janki Nath Sarangi, was a non-gazetted Government servant working as Sub-Divisional Officer in the Public Works Department of the Orissa State. As a result of disciplinary proceedings against him he was ordered to be dismissed by the Chief Engineer on October 30, 1957. Two charges were framed against him of which the second charge is no longer in dispute because it was dropped. The first charge related to his misconduct which is described as joining hands with a contractor by inflating the work done by him in the annual repairs of the Aur Ring Bund (Embankment No. 31-B) of Brahmani river under Mahanadi Division by falsely certifying that he had checked measurements in the measurement book which measurements were later found to be incorrect. This first charge concerned certain pits from which earth was extracted in the 1st mile 3rd and 4th quarters, 6th mile 3rd and 4th quarters and 7th mile Ist quarter. In the first mile there was a discrepancy of 3137 c. ft. when the Executive Engineer verified the measurements. This was said to have caused a loss of Rs. 150/- to the Government. In the 5th mile and the 7th mile the measurements were said to have been inflated by about 27.367 c. ft. entailing loss of Rs. 438/- to the Government.

2. These charges ware enquired into by a Member of the Administrative Tribunal, Orissa who gave his findings on 10th October, 1956 holding them proved. The Member also recommended a punishment of dismissal against the appellant. The second show cause notice against the punishment was given to the appellant who duly showed cause but it was not accepted. The order of dismissal as stated above was passed against him.

3. The High Court dismissed the petition which had been filed before it questioning the order of dismissal on the ground that principles of naturaljustice were violated in making the enquiry. The present appeal is by special leave of this Court.

4. In this appeal it is also contended that the principles of natural justice were violated in the conduct of the enquiry and in support it is urged that the appellant was denied the right of, leading his evidence in defence and also that he was not given inspection of some material which was used against him but was collected behind his back. The second instance be in which the present pleas arise was as follows : The work was completed in the first mile in November, 1953 and January, 1954. The earth work was checked by measurement by the appellant on March 6, 1954. Later, the Executive Engineer rechecked the measurement on May 8, 1954 when the inflated measurements were detected. In the 6th mile the work was completed in October 1953 and January 1954. The measurements were checked by the Enforcement Department in the presence of the Executive Engineer on July 21, 1954 and the inflated measurements were discovered. The case of the appellant was that due to natural causes such as rain, flood, etc. the pits and the witnesses had got obliterated. The report against him was that false witnesses had been created and the earth work between the pits had been artificially raised to show a deeper digging, than was actually done. In fact the pits were supposed to go to a depth of 1 foot but they were invariably found to be only 7 to 8 inches deep. The question was whether the action of rain and or floods was responsible for obliterating the true measurement and giving a wrong picture at the time of re-checking. In this connection, the appellant wished to examine one Mr. Mohanty or one Mr. Pujari, retired Superintending Engineers as his witnesses. The Enquiring Officer did not examine these witnesses first because he had a technical man Mr. Dass, Superintending Engineer to assist him to whom the same questions could be referred and next that 8 instances which were the subject of debate between the appellant and the Department were referred by the Enquiring Officer to the Chief Engineer for his opinion. The replies of th