The acquittal in a criminal case does not override findings from a domestic enquiry due to differing standards of proof.

JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.

1. By filing the instant writ petition the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ against the respondents/authorities for setting aside and/or quashing its reasoned order dated April 14, 2017 whereby and whereunder the writ petitioner’s requests for reinstatement, was not considered favourably by the respondent no. 3.

2. For effective adjudication of the instant lis, the facts leading to filing of the instant writ petition are required to be dealt with in a nutshell and those are as under:

i) According to the writ petitioner he was a Group – ‘D’ staff as ‘Shramik’ under the respondents/authorities;

ii) On 26.08.2001, an allegation of theft was leveled against the writ petitioner by the respondents/authorities. Consequently, an FIR was lodged against him in the jurisdictional Police Station under Section 479/411 IPC and thus, a criminal case was initiated by the said jurisdictional Police Station;

iii) On 28.08.2001, the writ petitioner was suspended from his employment;

iv) On 05.09.2001, a charge-sheet was submitted against the writ petitioner;

v) On 02.11.2001, enquiry officer issued a letter to the delinquent informing the next date of enquiry proceeding has been fixed on 20.11.2001;

vi) On 07.12.2001, the enquiry authority submitted its finding with regard to the charges as framed against the delinquent;

vii) On 12.02.2002, the writ petitioner was dismissed from service by the respondent no. 2/authority;

viii) On 16.06.2014, the writ petitioner was acquitted from the criminal case as initiated against him;

ix) On 19.08.2015, the writ petitioner submitted a representation before the respondents authorities for reinstating him in the service on account of his acquittal, however, the same was not considered favourably;

x) On 07.12.2015, the writ petitioner sent a legal notice to the respondents/authorities which was also not adhered to;

xi) The writ petitioner approached this High Court by filing WP 27266 (W) of 2016 before a co-ordinate Bench wherein the said co-ordinate Bench disposed of the said petition directing the respondent no. 3 herein to consider and dispose the representation dated August 19, 2015 as submitted by the writ petitioner in accordance with law and the rules governing in the field within a specified time;

xii) Pursuant to the said order and judgment dated 15.02.2017, the reasoned order came to be passed which was under challenge in the instant writ petition.

3. In course of his submission, Mr. Saha, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner at the very outset draws attention of this Court to Page No. 32 of the affidavit-in-opposition. It is submitted that from Page No. 32 of the affidavit-in-opposition being Annexure R-1, it would reveal that one Nepal Chandra Nayak, SSI, IC of the respondents/authorities had lodged a complaint in writing against the delinquent who is the petitioner herein alleging theft by the writ petitioner on 26.08.2001.

4. In course of his submission, Mr. Saha draws attention of this Court to Page No. 42 to 45 being the copy of the judgment and order of acquittal as passed by the Jurisdictional Magistrate in G.R. Case No. 805 of 2001. Drawing attention of this Court to the judgment and order dated 16.06.2014 as passed in G.R. Case No. 805 of 2001, it is contended by Mr. Saha that in the said criminal proceeding, the said informant has been arrayed as a prosecution witness and the learned Judicial Magistrate while passing the said order of acquittal, found that the evidence of P.W. 1 is not at all trustworthy to bring home the charges as framed against the accused. Learned Judicial Magistrate further found that the P.W. 2 stated nothing against the accused in the said criminal trial and thus, the accused who is the writ petitioner before this Court was honourably acquitted from the said criminal trial.

5. In his next fold of submission, Mr. Saha draws attention of this Court to the copy of the proceedings and findings of the enq