SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Cal) 92

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Dr. Bijaya Prasad Samantaray - Appellant
Versus
The Board Of Trustees For The Port Of Kolkata & Ors. - Respondents
WPO 408 of 2011
Decided on : 16-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Sanjib Kr. Mukhopadhyay, Adv., Ms. Aparupa Bhattacharya, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Kallol Basu, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ashok Kumar Jena, Adv.

Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited; courts defer to disciplinary authorities unless findings are perverse or unsupported by evidence.

Headnote:(A) Calcutta Port Trust Employees' (Conduct) Regulations, 1987 - Departmental Enquiry - Misconduct charges against Health Officer for negligence and false declarations - Enquiry Officer found charges established based on evidence - Appellate Authority upheld findings and penalty imposed. (Paras 1-4, 10-12)

(B) Judicial Review - Scope of judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited; courts defer to disciplinary authorities unless findings are perverse or unsupported by evidence. (Paras 6-9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the findings of a departmental enquiry that established charges of misconduct against him, including negligence in issuing pay orders and false declarations regarding dependents.

Findings of Court:
The disciplinary authority's findings were based on extensive evidence and upheld the penalty of pay reduction for misconduct.

Issues: The main issues included the validity of the charges against the petitioner and the appropriateness of the penalty imposed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that judicial review does not extend to re-evaluating evidence but ensures adherence to natural justice and proportionality in penalties.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

1. The present writ petition has been preferred praying for direction upon the respondents and each one of them, their men, agents, assignees and subordinate to rescind, recall, revoke and/or withdraw the enquiry proceeding, findings of the Enquiry Officer, penalty order passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority’s order.

2. The petitioner during his service tenure faced departmental enquiry which has been challenged in the present case. The charges as framed are as follows:

    ARTICLE OF CHARGE – I

    That the said Dr. Bijay Prasad Samantaray is charged with misconduct inasmuch as while working as Health Officer under Medical Department he issued G-20 Bill dated 30.09.2004 after more than three years from receipt of Sr. Accounts Officer (Pre-Audit)'s letter bearing No. 33 dated 27.09.2001 advising issue of pay order of Rs.17,608/- in favour of Sri Ganga Prasad, Safai Mazdoor, Item No.161 being the refund of past salary attached by the Court.

    By the above act, the said Dr. Samantaray has exhibited gross irresponsibility and neglect of duty which is unbecoming of an Office of Kolkata Port Trust.

    (PROVED)

    ARTICLE OF CHARGE – II

    That the said Dr. Bijay Prasad Samantaray is charged with misconduct inasmuch as while working as Health Officer under Medical Department he did not allow Sri Sumarilal, Safai Mazdoor, Item No.297 to resume duty on 16.08.2004 and unnecessarily caused harassment by deferring the resumption order upto 28.09.2004, despite the fact that Sri Sumarilal prayed for resumption of duty on 16.08.2004, on the ground that said Sumarilal was on unauthorized absence.

    By the above act, the said Dr. Samantaray had exhibited gross irresponsibility and neglect of duty, which is unbecoming of an Officer of Kolkata Port Trust.

    (PROVED)

    ARTICLE OF CHARGE – III

    That the said Dr. Bijaya Prasad Samantaray is charged with misconduct inasmuch as while working as Health Officer under Medical Department he had submitted Family Declaration Card bearing No. MO/0855 on 01.10.1983 declaring his parents as dependent on him and had availed the LTC benefits in the Block Year 1984-1987 in favour of his parents although they were never dependent on him.

    By giving such false declaration and also by drawing financial benefits in unauthorized manner, the said Dr. Samantaray had exhibited lack of integrity violating Regulation 3 of CPT Employees" (Conduct) Regulations, 1987, which is unbecoming of an Officer of Kolkata Port Trust.

    (PROVED)

3. The Enquiry Officer conducting an extensive enquiry in respect of all the charges framed against the petitioner and relying upon the evidence and documents, gave his findings as follows:-

    “4.73 On scrutinising the oral and documentary evidences relating to three charges framed against Dr. B.P. Samantaray the charge officer it is found that:-

    i. the charged officer D. B.P. Samantaray the then Health Officer cancelled the pay order which was prepared by Sri Partha Chakraborty the concerned dealing clerk, MW-8 and was put before him on 08.10.2001 (Exbt. M-XVII) for refund of Rs.17,608/- to Sri Ganga Prosad, Item No.161 on the basis of the advice bearing No.33 dated 27.09.2001 (Exbt. M-XIII) from Audit Section (C), Finance Department was clearly stated by Sri Indra Nath Adhya, Asstt. Administrative Officer, MW-4 in his recorded statement (Exbt. M-XXV). As such no refund was made in 2001.

    Instead of issuing pay order the C.O. unnecessary delayed it by issuing a letter No.HO/Insolve/II/161/2 dated 02.11.2001 (Exbt. M-XVIII) asking for reexamination of the case and according to MW-4 he did not take any action till 2004. On pursuance of Sri Indra Nath Adhya, MW- 4 with concerned officer/dealing clerk by issuing letters to Senior Accounts Office (Pre-Audit) the mater to refund Rs.17,608/- to Sri Ganga Prosad the safai Mazdoor the pay order dated 30.09.2004, G-20 bill was raised on 30.09.2004 and finally the payment was made to Sri Ganga Prosad on 30.09.2004.

    It is not understood why the

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top