IMPORTANT POINT
Acquittal in criminal proceedings based on identical allegations renders continuation of departmental proceedings unjust and unfair.

JUDGMENT :

KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.

1. Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D. Das, learned counsel for the parties. Also heard Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondent.

2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is assailing the impugned departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner by show-cause notice dated 09.02.2018.

The facts of the present case are that:

3. The petitioner while serving as Chief Executive Officer at Darrang Zila Parishad was arrested by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Cell, Assam in connection with the ACB PS Case No. 24/2017 under sections 7/13(1)(d)/13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (herein referred to as PC Act, 1988) on 22.09.2017. In pursuant to the said arrest, the respondent authorities issued a show-cause notice dated 09.02.2018 to the petitioner under Rule 9 of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 read with Article 311 of the Constitution of India. (Herein referred to as Rules of 1964).

4. Accordingly along with the departmental proceeding a criminal proceeding being Special Case No. 32/2017 had commenced against the petitioner before the learned Court of Special Judge, Assam. The learned Court of Special Judge, Assam vide Judgment and Order dated 19.07.2023 was pleased to acquit the petitioner from the charges framed therein. Thereafter, the petitioner filed two representations to the respondent authorities praying to drop the departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner.

5. As no action was forthcoming the petitioner has approached this Hon'ble Court by way of the instant writ petition praying for setting aside the impugned action of the respondents in continuing with the departmental proceeding against the petitioner.

6. Mr. K. N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel submits that the departmental proceeding is initiated on the basis of the allegation made in the FIR dated 21.09.2017, which has been registered as ACB PS Case No. 24/2017 under Section 7/13(1) (d)/13 (2) of the PC Act,1988.

7. He further submits that the list of witnesses in the said departmental proceeding are also the same as that of the criminal case.

8. He further submits that Criminal Court by Judgment and Order dated 19.07.2023 has acquitted the petitioner of the charges framed against him.

9. He accordingly submits that departmental proceeding and criminal case being based on identical and similar set of facts and wherein the criminal court having acquitted the petitioner from the charges levelled therein, it would be unjust and unfair to continue the departmental proceeding against the petitioner on the same set of allegation.

10. He further relies upon the following decisions of the Apex Court in the case of:

(i) G.M. Tank Vs. State of Gujarat and Others, (2006) 5 SCC 446

(ii) Capt. M. Paul Anthony Vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd and Another, (1999) 3 SCC 679

11. Per contra Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the nature of proceedings in criminal vis-à-vis departmental enquiry being wholly separate and distinct, acquittal in criminal proceedings does not entitle the delinquent employee for automatic discharge in departmental proceeding.

12. She further relies upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of State Bank of India & Ors. Vs. P. Zadenga, 2023 Live Law (SC) 850.

13. Heard the learned counsels for the contesting parties and perused the materials available on record and also considered the case laws cited at the bar.

14. It appears that by show-cause notice dated 09.02.2018 the petitioner was required to show-cause under Rule 9 of the Rules of 1964 readwith Article 311 of the Constitution of India as why any of the penalties prescribed in Rule 7 of the aforesaid rules should not be inflicted upon the petitioner on the charges stipulated therein.

15. The statement of allegation as appended to the show-cause notice dated 09.02.20