JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. U.K. Nair, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr.S.K. Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R. Dhar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

2. Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass in the present writ petition, the presence of the respondent No. 4 and 5 is not felt necessary. Further to that, issuance of notice and staying any further proceedings would only derail the departmental proceedings so pending before the respondent No. 4.

3. The fact of the instant case is that the petitioner was dismissed from service vide an order dated 26/8/2016. Thereupon the petitioner appealed against the said decision and the appeal was dismissed vide the order dated 20/2/2017.

4. The petitioner being aggrieved approached this Court and filed a Writ Petition which was registered and numbered as W.P.(C) No. 1710/2017. This Court after taking into consideration the various contentions had set aside the said order of punishment dated 20/8/2016 and directed de-novo proceedings to be initiated by the respondent No. 4/Board. Paragraph 22 of the said judgment in W.P.(C) No. 1710/2017 being relevant is quoted herein below :

22. That being the position, this Court directs as follows :-

(i) The punishment imposed upon the petitioner vide order dated 20.08.2016 is hereby set aside and quashed.

(ii) The respondent Board shall start the proceeding de-novo against the petitioner by issuing a fresh show cause notice on the basis of allegation of misbehavior/threatening alleged by the then chairman, Vice Chairman and Executive Officer of the Barpeta Road Municipal Board.

(iii) The entire proceeding shall be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

(iv) The petitioner shall participate in the proceeding and the petitioner shall not create any inappropriate situation during the departmental enquiry.

(v) The petitioner is hereby reinstated in service for the purpose of the de-novo proceeding; however, he shall continue to remain under such suspension during pendency of the departmental proceeding.

(vi) The petitioner shall be entitled for the subsistence allowance during such period of suspension.

(vii) In the aforesaid terms, this writ petition is disposed of however, no order as to cost.

5. It further appears that although by the judgment dated 20/12/2021, the departmental proceedings de-novo was to complete within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment but the respondent No.4/Board could not complete the same for which the respondent No. 4/Board filed an interlocutory application being I.A. (Civil) No.1801/2022 before this court seeking extension of the period till 16/12/2022. This Court vide order dated 30/11/2022 in IA(Civil) No.1801/2022 disposed off the said application thereby granting the respondent authority to complete and comply with the directions passed by this Court in the judgment dated 20/12/2021 in W.P.(C) No. 1710/2017 by 16/12/2022.

6. It further appears from the pleadings that as within the said period, the departmental proceedings were not completed, a contempt proceedings was also initiated which was registered and numbered as Cont. Cas (C) No. 784/2022 and this Court vide an order dated 21/12/2022 had issued notice making it returnable by 6(six) weeks.

7. It further appears that an undated enquiry report was submitted to the chairman of the respondent No. 4 and as per the said enquiry report all the charges brought against the petitioner were proved beyond doubt. However, it is relevant to take note of that in the said enquiry report there is a seal of receipt on 17/12/2022. Be that as it may, the petitioner was issued a second show cause notice dated 1/2/2023 asking the petitioner to submit his reply within 7(seven) days as to why the petitioner should not be dismissed from service. The petitioner thereupon on 7/2/2023 had submitted his show cause rep