Judgment

KASLIWAL, J.:- Special Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the Judgment of the Orissa Administrative Tribunal dated 2-11-1991.

3. The facts in brief are that the appellant was working as Nizarat Officer in the Collectorate of Baripada in the State of Orissa. While working on such post the Additional District Magistrate on 24-5-1973 lodged a report about the cash amounting to Rs.30,877.53/- missing from the Collectorates funds. The appellant found involved in the said matter was placed under suspension by an order dated 9-4-1974. The disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the appellant for the charges of misappropriation of cash and negligence in performance of duty on 7-10-1974. A criminal case under Section 409, I.P.C. was also instituted against the appellant and one Anil Chandra Patnaik who was working as Nazir at the relevant time. The appellant and the said Anil Chandra Patnaik were both convicted in the criminal case by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by order dated 28-9-1977. The appellant was dismissed from service on the basis of the aforesaid Judgment by order dated 12-1-1978.

4. The appellant filed an appeal against his conviction and sentence and was acquitted in appeal by the learned Sessions Judge by an order dated 11-5-1979. According to the appellant he was acquitted both on merits as well as on the ground of want of proper sanction. Leave to appeal filed by the State Government against the acquittal of the appellant was dismissed by the High Court on 9-10-1979. The appellant was reinstated in service by order of 18-4-1980 and the period during which he remained under suspension and dismissal was ordered to be treated as the period spent on duty. The appellant retired from service having attained the age of superannuation on 31-1-1981. The Government by order dated 20th April, 1981 restarted the disciplinary proceedings against the appellant. The representations made by the appellant to the State Government against the revival of the disciplinary proceedings were rejected and the Collector by letter dated 16th July, 1981 informed the appellant that the disciplinary proceedings would continue.

5. The appellant in these circumstances filed a writ petition in the High Court on 26th September, 1981 challenging the action of restarting the disciplinary proceedings. The writ petition was transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal in 1988. The Administrative Tribunal dismissed the petition filed by the appellant by order dated 2-11-1991. Aggrieved against the order of Administrative Tribunal the appellant has come before this Court in appeal.

6. It may also be necessary to state that Shri Anil Chandra Patnaik the alleged coaccused with the appellant in the criminal case and who was working as Nazir at the relevant time was convicted along with the appellant by the Chief Judicial Magistrate by a common Judgment dated 28-9-1977 as already mentioned above. The appeal filed by Anil Chandra Patnaik against his conviction was dismissed by the Sessions Court by order dated 11-5-79. Anil Chandra Patnaik then challenged his conviction by filing a revision in the High Court. The High Court not only acquitted Anil Chandra Patnaik but also made some observations which were made the basis for restarting the disciplinary proceedings against the appellant by the Government. It is also worthwhile to note that Shri Anil Chandra Patnaik alleged co-accused of the appellant after his acquittal from the High Court challenged the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him by filing a writ petition in the High Court. The said writ petition was transferred to the Administrative Tribunal in T.A. No. 651 of 1987 and the Tribunal allowed the said petition and quashed the disciplinary proceedings pending against Anil Chandra Patnaik.

7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have thoroughly perused the record. The Tribunal in its impugned order has been influenced by certain observations made by