Back
1996 Supreme(Cal) 186
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Satya Narayan Chakraborty, J.
Sujit Das
v.
W. B. Board of Secondary Education & Ors.
Appeal No. 225 of 1995 & Matter No. 612 of 1994
Decided On : April 26, 1996
The principles of natural justice, including the right to be heard and the right to inspect relevant documents, must be complied with in disciplinary proceedings against an employee.
Headnote:
WEST BENGAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT, 1963 - RULE 28(8) - DISMISSAL OF EMPLOYEE - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - JURISDICTION OF HIGH COURT - WRIT PETITION - MAINTAINABILITY:
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, Headmaster of a school under the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, was issued a charge sheet containing 18 charges of misconduct. He sought inspection of documents related to the charges but was not provided with all the documents. He submitted a reply reserving his right to submit a further reply if he was granted inspection of the other documents. A second show-cause notice was issued to him, and he filed a writ petition challenging the order. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner was estopped from questioning the appointment of the Administrator and that the principles of natural justice had been complied with.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the principles of natural justice were not complied with in the petitioner's case. He had not been given an opportunity to inspect all the documents, and he was asked to show cause even before the approval of the Section 24 Committee had been taken. In his reply, he clearly stated that the principles of natural justice had been violated as he was not permitted to take inspection of all the relevant documents.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was estopped from questioning the appointment of the Administrator? 2. Whether the principles of natural justice were complied with in the petitioner's case?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the petitioner was estopped from questioning the appointment of the Administrator as he had worked under the Administrator for a pretty long time, sought for extension of his tenure as Headmaster, accepted the charge-sheet and submitted reply thereto without any demur whatsoever. 2. The Court held that the principles of natural justice were not complied with in the petitioner's case. He had not been given an opportunity to inspect all the documents, and he was asked to show cause even before the approval of the Section 24 Committee had been taken. In his reply, he clearly stated that the principles of natural justice had been violated as he was not permitted to take inspection of all the relevant documents.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order of the High Court, and allowed the writ petition filed by the appellant to the extent mentioned in the judgment. However, there was no order as to costs.
The judgment of the Court was as follows :
Sinha, J.: This appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 4th May, 1995 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the petitioner's writ application questioning the order dated 24.06.1991 passed by the Appeal Committee of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education dismissing the Appeal preferred by the writ petitioner, inter alia against an order issuing a second show-cause notice in a disciplinary proceedings filed against the writ petitioner was dismissed.
2. The appellant in the said writ application, inter alto, had prayed for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of certiorari for quashing the aforementioned order passed by the Appeal Committee is also for a writ of or in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint an Administrator in the school in place of the Managing Committee and for a declaration that the appointment of the respondent Nripati Chowdhury as Administrator of the school was Illegal and void.
3. The fact of the matter shortly stated is as follows :-
The petitioner at the material time was appointed as a Head master on 01.01.1963. The term of the Managing Committee was valid till 30th June, 1985. The term of the Managing Committee was extended till November 30.1986. On or about 6th May, 1987 an Administrator was appointed as Managing Committee bad become defunct. On 1st September, 1989 the appellant was placed under suspension which was subsequently approved by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'). An appeal was preferred by the appellant against the said order of suspension before the Appeal Committee which was marked as Appeal No.6 of 1990.
4. On or about 12th September, 1989 a charge sheet was issued as against the petitioner enlisting as many as 18 charges contained in pages 146 to 173 of the Paper Book.
5. The Administrator in terms of the said charge-sheet dated 12th September, 1989 asked the appellant to submit his reply within a fortnight from the date of receipt thereof so as to enable him to offer reasonable facilities to defend himself in accordance with Rule 28(8) of the Rules for Management of Recognised Non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided), 1969 as Amended.
6. The appellant sought for inspection of a large number of documents mentioned in the charge-sheet by his letter dated 23.09.1989 He was given inspection of some of the documents between 26.09.1989 to 06.11.1989. On 13.11.1989 be submitted a reply reserving his right to submit a further reply in the event be was granted inspection of the other documents. A writ petition was filed by several guardians of the school questioning appointment of the Administrator which was marked as C.O. No. 7746(W) of 1989 A second show-cause notice was issued by the Administrator on 06.03.1990 asking the petitioner to show-cause as to why a punishment of dismissal from service should not be imposed upon him stating that upon consideration of the reply submitted by him and he had come to the said conclusion upon perusal the relevant document Including the charge-sheet and reply that he bas committed the said misconducts in the said notice it was further stated that all relevant documents including the report of Enquiry officers were submitted to the Committee constituted under Section 24 of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act. 1963 for its consideration and approval of the first part of the disciplinary proceedings in terms of Rule 28(8) of the said Rules and the said Committee in its meeting dated 22nd February, 1990 after thorough scrutiny of the relevant papers and documents was pleased to grant approval of the said first part of the disciplinary proceedings drawn against him and he was permitted to draw the second part of the disciplinary proceedings in terms of the Management Rules whereafter the aforementioned charge-sheet dated 12.09.1939 had been issued.
7. The appellant filed a writ
