Disciplinary proceedings are vitiated when authorities fail to comply with mandatory procedural rules, including the supply of enquiry reports to the delinquent officer. Reliance on findings from inquiries conducted in violation of prior judicial directions or fundamental principles of natural justice renders subsequent penalty orders unsustainable.

ORDER :

N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.

Heard Mr. M. Nath, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. Mousam Nath, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Dhar, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the Public Works Department.

2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present writ petition, has presented a challenge to the order dated 17-10-2022, issued by the Chief Engineer, PWD (Road) Assam, imposing upon the petitioner the penalty of stoppage of 01 (one) annual increment without cumulative effect and further holding that the period of suspension of the petitioner be treated as non-duty for all purposes.

3. The facts in brief requisite for adjudication of the issues arising in the present writ petition are noticed, as under.

The petitioner, herein, was issued with a show cause notice dated 13-01-2016, inter alia, alleging, therein, that the petitioner while serving as a Section Assistant under Golaghat Rural Road Division, was found to be very irregular in attendance of his duties. It was further alleged that the petitioner was found to be functioning as an active journalist of Golaghat Press Club for last several years. It was further alleged that the petitioner on being issued with an order of transfer and being released from his place of posting at Golaghat Rural Road Division, had failed to join at his transferred place of posting, inspite of notices being issued to him including notices published in newspapers. The petitioner submitted his reply to the said show cause notice dated 13-01-2016. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority not being satisfied with the reply submitted by the petitioner, proceeded to direct for holding of an enquiry in the matter. The Enquiry Officer's report having been submitted, the Disciplinary Authority proceeded vide order dated 29.02.2016, to impose the penalty of dismissal from service upon the petitioner, herein.

The petitioner being aggrieved by the imposition of the penalty of dismissal from service upon him, assailed the same before this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being W.P.(C)No.2979/2016. This Court analogously heard the said writ petition along with another writ petition filed by the petitioner being W.P.(C) No.1121/2016.

On a consideration of the issues arising in the matter, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, proceeded vide order dated 08-06-2016, to dispose of the writ petition being W.P. (C) No.2979/2016, interfering with the order imposing the penalty of dismissal from service upon the petitioner, i.e., the order dated 29-02-2016. This Court further directed that on the interference being made with the order of dismissal, the order of suspension as issued to the petitioner would stand revived and the petitioner would be entitled to subsistence allowance from the date of his suspension, i.e., w.e.f., 07-09-2015. This Court further granted liberty to the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner to institute a fresh enquiry against him in the matter but restrained the authorities from carrying out such enquiry by engaging the already engaged Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer. This Court required the Disciplinary Authority to appoint a new set of Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer and to complete the enquiry by following the procedure as mandated under Rule 9 of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1964.

It is found that after the passing of the said order dated 08-06-2016, by this Court, the Disciplinary Authority of the petit