N. Y. HANUMANTHAPPA, J, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant preferred this writ appeal questioning the judgment and order dated 16-7-1991 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition no. 9488 of 1987 refusing to grant writ of prohibition restraining the respondent from proceeding further in pursuance of the order dated 31-3-1987 of the Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Regional office, Madras and to further direct the respondent to treat the period of suspension between 8-11-1979 and 8-3-1985 as regular and pay the salary for the said period and grant such other benefits as the appellant is entitled to. For the purpose of disposal of this writ appeal, the ranks of the parties have been mentioned as they were arrayed in the writ petition.

( 2 ) THE petitioner was appointed as Junior Inspector, Oriental Insurance company on 5-8-1976. In the year 1979, he was promoted as Grade I Inspector with effect from 5-8-1978. On 10-5-1979, newspapers reported the progress of cyclonic storm and about the possibility of heavy rainfall. On 11-5-1979, the press reported that a cyclonic storm was likely to cross coast at Nellore by Friday morning and tidal waves about 2 metres above normal were expected. At that time, the petitioner was working as Probationary Inspector, grade I and he issued two cover notes for a total sum of Rs. 2,41,35,000/- on 11-5-1979. The respondent found that the petitioner acted in excess of his authority and in the manner prejudicial to the interests of the Insurance company and that he was negligent in the performance of his duties. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him on 8-11-1979 and he was suspended from service on the same day.

( 3 ) WHEN the disciplinary proceedings were initiated, the respondent also launched criminal proceedings against the petitioner in C. C. No. 13 of 1981 before the Principal Special Judge for S. P. E and A. C. B. Cases, Hyderabad for offences punishable under Sections 420 read with 511 IPC, 120 B read with section 420 of I. P. C. and 5 (2) read with Section 5 (l) (d) of the Prevention of corruption Act, and for specific offences under Section 420 of I. P. C. read with sections 511 and 34 of I. P. C. and Sections 466, 467,471 and 477-A Indian Penal code, and under Section 5 (3-A) read with 5 (l) (d) of the Prevention of corruption Act. On the basis of the complaint, the following charges were framed:" Charge under Section 120-B read with Section 420 IPC and 5 (2) read with Section 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Act 11 of 1947) against A-1 to A. 19. Charges under Section 420 read with Section 511 IPC read with Sec. 34, ipc of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Section 467 IPC and Sec. 471, ipc under Section 109, IPC Section 5 (1) (d ). of the Prevention of corruption Act, Section 467 and 471 IPC against A-l. "

( 4 ) EVIDENCE was given on both sides. On behalf of prosecution, one l. K. Narasimha Rao, Branch Manager was examined as PW. 1 apart from 21 others. No evidence was adduced on behalf of defence. After going through the evidence, the Court below found, that the primary and most important circumstance on which reliance placed by the prosecution is, that the Insurance inspector or the Rural representative have no authority to issue the cover notes. On this point, it referred to the evidence of PW. 1 who spoke about the procedure to be followed in issuing cover notes. The prosecution also examined pw. 11 G. Srinivasan, Assistant Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance company, Vijayawada who also deposed the procedure for issuing cover notes. On consideration of the evidence, the Court below held that the prosecution has thoroughly failed to prove any of the offences charged against the accused, and accordingly acquitted the accused, by its judgment dated 6-3-1984 of all the charges levelled against them. Subsequent to this acquittal, the order of suspension of the petitioner was revoked on 8-3-1995 (sic. 8-3-1985 ). Challenging the order passed by learned

Click Here to Read the rest of this document