Back
2019 Supreme(Pat) 916
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, Anjana Mishra, JJ.
Krishna Kant Jha, Son of Late Kamla Kant Jha – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Law Department and ors. – Respondents
Letters Patent Appeal No.1459 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13226 of 2014
Decided On : 16-07-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Gyanand Roy
For the Respondent: Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Ms. Smriti Singh
Headnote:
Service Law – Dismissal – When it comes to recording of reasons on the basis of material evidence which has been led and exists on record, reason howsoever brief deserves to be recorded in any order, particularly in a matter arising out of a disciplinary proceeding – Impugned appellate order nowhere reflects the same – Records which have been produced also do not indicate existence of any reasons in deliberations of appellate authority – May be records were before Committee and had been perused but even this is not reflected in the order – Existence of power is one thing and its exercise is another – Exercise of such powers is clearly quasi-judicial in nature – Recording of at least brief reasons may be necessary, particularly in cases where evidence is being contested in background of present case – In instant case, appellate authority has rejected appeal, thereby confirming order of disciplinary authority – Appellate or revisional authority, if it affirms a punishment order, need not give separate reasons if appellate or revisional authority agrees with reasons contained in order under challenge – Giving of reasons is conducive and is an essential element of administration of justice – Separate reasons may not be required while affirming order of punishment, but reasons which are being affirmed should find some discussion or reference in order to indicate that appellate authority has taken into consideration not only reasons recorded by disciplinary authority, but also grounds taken for questioning correctness of such reasons – Appellate order set aside with a request to High Court to consider appeal again and take an appropriate decision in the matter. (Paras 12, 14, 15, 17 and 23)
Appeal – Presumption of a valid exercise of appellate power by an authority none else than Standing Committee of High Court constituted under Patna High Court Rules consisting of Chief Justice and six Puisne Judges – Presumption of consideration would be complete if there is some reflection of consideration of entire material on record – It is a presumption about consideration of material or grounds of appeal that comes to fore for consideration – Ultimate decision by a one word or one phrase appellate order, that does not reflect on consideration of grounds of an appeal and material on record, cannot by itself be said to indicate some kind of a gloss over material on record – Ultimate recording of a decision in order to raise such a presumption of consideration of material on record and grounds of appeal can be validated if decision or resolution, howsoever brief it may be, indicates acceptance of reasons recorded by disciplinary authority or rejection of grounds of appeal – Function of deciding an appeal on administrative side can at best be a quasi-judicial function but it should not be lost sight of that whenever a penalty is imposed or a punishment awarded it brings about serious civil consequences and amounts to deprivation of a means of livelihood in cases like dismissal or termination – In such matters, hope and expectation from an appellate authority to decide upon a consideration of entire material is a genuine expectation which can be satisfied by expression of a few words, howsoever brief they are, that may reflect a presumption of consideration – Recording of even a consideration of defence of appellant or reasons not to accept them is within realm of appellate authority and also its obligation. (Paras 28, 29 and 30)
JUDGMENT :
Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.
Does an appellate authority owe any obligation to record reasons while affirming a dismissal order or not is the moot question raised in this appeal, which in turn also involves the issue of presumption of a valid exercise of appellate power by an authority none else than the Standing Committee of the High Court constituted under the Patna High Court Rules consisting of the Chief Justice and six puisne Judges. The presumption that a collective decision of the Standing Committee was arrived at upon a full consideration of the issues raised in the appeal which did not require recording of separate reasons while affirming the punishment order, is at the core of this debate.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents. The appellant is a dismissed Class-III employee of the District Judgeship of Darbhanga.
3. Taking exception to the rejection of his appeal by the High Court on the administrative side, the appellant filed a writ petition challenging the order of dismissal as also the appellate order. The writ petition was dismissed by a learned single Judge on the ground that since the witnesses were examined and cross-examined during enquiry, therefore there is no procedural violation and consequently, no prejudice was caused to the appellant. The learned single Judge further recorded the finding that the allegation of non-supply of the statements during preliminary enquiry did not also cause any prejudice as the detail enquiry followed by a second show cause to the appellant had given all opportunity to him before the dismissal order was passed. The learned single Judge also held that the statements that were recorded during the preliminary enquiry had lost their significance on account of a regular enquiry having been held, and the statements of witnesses having been recorded with opportunity of cross-examining to the appellant.
4. In the penultimate paragraph, the learned single Judge records that even if the matter is remanded to the appellate authority for a decision by assigning reasons, the same would be of no legal consequence as there is no possibility of change in the decision of the appellate authority since the alleged non-supply of statements recorded during the preliminary enquiry will have no bearing on the matter.
5. Assailing the aforesaid findings, the present appeal has been filed and the learned counsel for the appellant contends that non-recording of reasons by itself vitiates the appellate order inasmuch as the appellate order as brought on record through the counter affidavit, which is in the shape of a resolution of the Standing Committee of the High Court clearly indicates that the appeal has been rejected by a one line sentence “The appeal be rejected”.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken the Court through the documents on record and we have also perused the original record that was produced before us. The original record indicates that the incident was not reported by the Lawyers who deposed during enquiry about the taking of an alleged bribe by the appellant for the institution of a title suit in which a sitting Judge of this Court was a plaintiff. The complaint appears to have emanated at the instance of the then Hon’ble Inspecting Judge who appears to have issued a direction, upon which the then Registrar General issued a note to the District Judge, Darbhanga to enquire into the matter and also with regard to the status of posting of the employee. This set into motion a preliminary enquiry by the District Judge, Darbhanga who thereafter conducted a regular enquiry and recorded the statements of four witnesses. The first was of a Lawyer of the Darbhanga Civil Court Dr.Ashok Kumar Singh. The second was of another Lawyer of the same Court Shri Shashi Bhushan Prasad Singh and the third Shri Sunil Kumar Singh. The fourth witness Amarendra Singh disclosed his identity as an old client of Dr. Ashok Bahadur Singh. The de
