Back
2004 Supreme(Cal) 163
High Court Of Calcutta
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay
SRI AMALESH MAITY - Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
W. P. 2311 (W) Of 2001
Decided On : 03/08/2004
BANANI MUKHERJI, K.D.MUKHARJI, KESHAB BHATTACHARJI, P.B.MITRA, S.B.BHUNIYA
The principles of natural justice and procedural justice are fundamental requirements in disciplinary proceedings, and any violation of these principles renders the decision void.
Headnote:
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY - Dismissal from Service - Violation of Natural Justice Principles - Board of Directors' resolution holding petitioner guilty of theft and dishonesty - Based on report of private detective agency without affording petitioner opportunity to defend - Violation of principles of natural justice and procedural justice - Order of dismissal quashed - Petitioner to be reinstated with full back wages.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, an employee of the respondent cooperative society, was dismissed from service following a resolution passed by the Board of Directors holding him guilty of theft and dishonesty based on a report submitted by a private detective agency. The petitioner challenged the dismissal order, alleging violation of the principles of natural justice and procedural justice.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Board of Directors acted in an unlawful and illegal manner, flagrantly violating the principles of natural justice and procedural justice at every stage. The Court found that no formal charge sheet was issued to the petitioner, no enquiry officer was appointed, and the petitioner was not given an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or adduce evidence. The Court also held that the report of the private detective agency was prepared secretly and without complying with the basic principles of natural justice and procedural justice.
Issues: 1. Whether the Board of Directors' resolution holding the petitioner guilty of theft and dishonesty was valid in law? 2. Whether the petitioner was afforded an opportunity to defend himself in the disciplinary proceedings? 3. Whether the order of dismissal was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and procedural justice?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Board of Directors' resolution was not valid in law as it was passed without following the mandatory provisions of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, particularly Rule 48(f), which requires that no employee shall be dismissed from service except after an inquiry in which he has been informed of the charges against him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 2. The Court held that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to defend himself in the disciplinary proceedings as he was not issued a formal charge sheet, no enquiry officer was appointed, and he was not given an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or adduce evidence. 3. The Court held that the order of dismissal was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and procedural justice as the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to defend himself and the decision was based on a report prepared without complying with the basic principles of natural justice and procedural justice.
Final Decision: The Court quashed the order of dismissal and directed the reinstatement of the petitioner with full back wages.
( 1 ) THE petitioner herein has filed this writ petition challenging the validity and / or legality of the order of dismissal issued by the respondent No. 4 pursuant to the decision of the Board of Directors of the Dakshin Paikbarh samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited.
( 2 ) THE petitioner was appointed as a Cashier at Baguranjalpai Branch of Dakshin Paikbarh Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited. Subsequenty, the said petitioner was selected for the post of, Branch Cashier and was also appointed as Ledger Keeper (In-charge), Deppsit Section, in the head office.
( 3 ) THE Chairman of the Dakshin Paikbarh Samabay Krishi Unnayan samity Limited served a notice upon the petitioner on 11th September, 2000 asking him to show cause explaining his conduct in respect of the various allegations and/or misconducts mentioned in the said show cause notice. The petitioner replied to the said show cause notice denying all the allegations mentioned therein.
( 4 ) SUBSEQUENTLY, the Board of Directors of the Society engaged a private Detective Agency to investigate the instance of theft and dishonesty in connection with the business of the society. As a matter of fact, the petitioner also agreed to the aforesaid proposal regarding appointment of the Private Detective Agency to investigate the aforesaid allegations of theft and
( 5 ) THE said Private Detective Agency conducted the investigation and submitted the investigation report before the Board of Directors of the Society. The Board of Directors of the said Society considered the said investigation report of the Private Detective Agency wherein it has been alleged that the petitioner is one of the authors and conspirators of theft of pledged gold ornaments and dishonest work in connection with the business of the society. The Board of Directors accordingly passed a unanimous resolution holding the petitioner guilty of theft and dishonesty in connection with the business of the society and decided unanimously to inflict punishment of dismissal from service upon the said petitioner in terms of Clause 14 (b)/ (vii) of Chapter vi of Appendix to Rule 108 of W. B. C. S. Rules, 1987.
( 6 ) THE aforesaid decision of the Board of Directors was communicated to the petitioner by the Secretary of Dakshin Paikbarh Samabay Krishi unnayan Samity Limited by Memo No. 34/f-33 (2000-01) dated 8th december, 2000. The relevant portion from the said letter dated 8th December, 2000 is quoted hereunder :"whereas the Board of Directors of the Society engaged Detective bureau to investigate the instance of theft and dishonesty in connection with business of the society and you are being of the members of the staff posted at Head Office admitted in writing to acceed to the report of the investigating agency and thereafter decision to be adopted by the Board of Directors of the society on the basis of investigation report. Whereas, from the investigation report it is established that you are one of the authors and conspirators of the theft of pledge gold ornaments and dishonest work in connection within and as in the business of the society the Board on the basis of the enquiry report unanimously resolved on 2. 12. 2000 to earmark you as one of the guilties of theft and dishonesty in connection with Business of the Society vide Appendix to Chapter VI, Clause No. 14 (iii) under Rule 108 of w. B. C. S. Rules, 87. Whereas having been satisfied about gross misconduction of theft and dishonesty. The Board of Directors unanimously resolved on 2. 12. 2000 to inflict upon you punishment of dismissal from the service of the society in term of Clause No. 14 (b)/ (vii) of Chapter VI of appendix to Rule 108 of W. B. C. S. Rules, 87 for the interest of the society after giving you a last opportunity of being heard with seven days notice. "
( 7 ) THE petitioner herein replied to the said show cause notice dated 8th December, 2000 and denied his guilt as mentioned in the said notice dated 8th Dece
