Back
Orissa High Court
G.K.MISRA,B.K.PATRA
Harekrushna Mahtab - Appellant
Versus
Chief Minister of Orissa - Respondent
O. J. C. No. 1492 of 1968
Decided On : 09/23/1970
The Court held that the inquiry conducted by Sri Mudholkar was purely administrative and not quasi-judicial in nature. The Court further held that the inquiry did not affect the rights or interests of Dr. Mahtab in any manner and that Sri Mudholkar followed the principles of natural justice in conducting the inquiry as was appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Fact of the Case:
Sri Sadasiba Tripathy and 24 M. L. As. And M. Ps. Of the Congress Party alleged corruption and impropriety against Sarbasri R. N. Singh Deo (Chief Minister), Pabitra Mohan Pradhan (Deputy Chief Minister), S. N. Patnaik (Minister), Banamali Patnaik (Minister), Santanu Kumar Das (Minister), N. K. Choudhury (Ex-Chief Minister) and Dr. H. K. Mahtab (Ex-Chief Minister and petitioner).
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the inquiry conducted by Sri Mudholkar was purely administrative and not quasi-judicial in nature. The Court further held that the inquiry did not affect the rights or interests of Dr. Mahtab in any manner and that Sri Mudholkar followed the principles of natural justice in conducting the inquiry as was appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Issues: 1. Whether the inquiry conducted by Sri Mudholkar was quasi-judicial in nature? 2. Whether the inquiry affected the rights or interests of Dr. Mahtab? 3. Whether Sri Mudholkar followed the principles of natural justice in conducting the inquiry?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the inquiry conducted by Sri Mudholkar was purely administrative and not quasi-judicial in nature because: a. The authority conferring the power on Sri Mudholkar to make the enquiry did not make it obligatory either expressly or by necessary implication that the enquiry would be conducted in a quasi-judicial manner. b. The nature of the work Sri Mudholkar was called upon to perform was merely to examine the available materials to see if a prima facie case is made out for appointment of a Commission of Inquiry which itself would thoroughly go into all the allegations by following the principle of natural justice as is applicable to the facts and circumstances of a particular case. 2. The Court held that the inquiry did not affect the rights or interests of Dr. Mahtab in any manner because: a. The power conferred upon Sri Mudholkar was merely for preliminary verification of the allegations made. b. The verification would be with the object of seeing whether prima facie it is based on reliable materials which would justify the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry. c. The inquiry does not affect the rights or interest of the persons concerned. 3. The Court held that Sri Mudholkar followed the principles of natural justice in conducting the inquiry as was appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case because: a. Sri Mudholkar acted in a fair and just manner in the context of the duty imposed upon him. b. The fact that a comprehensive questionnaire was not ultimately supplied does not affect the crux of the matter.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the writ application filed by Dr. Mahtab.
Judgement
G. K. MISRA, C. J. :- On 27-6-1967 a memorial (Annexure 'A') was submitted to the President of India by Sri Sadasiba Tripathy and 24 M. L. As. And M. Ps. Of the Congress Party alleging corruption and impropriety against Sarbasri R. N. Singh Deo (Chief Minister), Pabitra Mohan Pradhan (Deputy Chief Minister), S. N. Patnaik (Minister), Banamali Patnaik (Minister), Santanu Kumar Das (Minister), N. K. Choudhury (Ex-Chief Minister) and Dr. H. K. Mahtab (Ex-Chief Minister and petitioner) and praying for the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry. This memorial was sent by Sri Chavan, the then Home Minister of India, to the Chief Minister for such action as the latter deemed proper. The Chief Minister wrote to Sri Chavan saying that on examination of the records available with the Government of Orissa, no prima facie case was made out against anyone of the aforesaid persons. He however said that if the Home Minister of India desired, he might get the matter examined by a sitting fudge of a High Court or the Supreme Court of India. Sri Chavan replied that it would not be possible to ask any sitting Judge to do the job and the matter might be examined by the Chief Minister through a retired High Court or Supreme Court Judge. Sri Mudholkar (Opposite Party No. 3), a retired Judge of the Supreme Court, agreed to examine the matter. He was appointed on 3-5-1968 to conduct the inquiry as per the following notification dated 3rd May, 1968 (Annexure 18').
"No. 303 MC. Shri J. R. Mudholkar, Retired Judge of the Supreme Court of India is appointed as a Special Judge against the post created in G. O. No. 292-EC dated the 3rd May, 1968 to conduct the enquiries entrusted to him by the State Government.
His headquarters will be at New Delhi.
By order of the Governor
B. B. Rath
Secretary to Government".
The Chief Minister addressed the letter (Annexure 2) to Sri Mudholkar on 3-5-1968 containing the terms of reference. The material portions of this letter are extracted hereunder :-
"xx xx xx
Under such circumstances, I refer the Memorial to you for a preliminary verification into any definite allegation contained therein as against any person who held office as a Chief Minister or a Minister sometime or other during the period 1947 to 1961. The preliminary verification should pertain to the discharge of the official duties of such persons who held office of a Chief Minister or a Minister
xx xx xx
On preliminary verification you are requested to report as to whether any prima facie case against any such person as aforesaid exists, and in case any prima facie case is found with respect to any of the allegations, you are also requested to report as to whether in public interest as at present a Commission of Inquiry should be established in order to have a full and complete enquiry into the said matters.
The preliminary enquiry may be conducted by you in accordance with such procedure as you deem fit and proper. However, the enquiry for all purposes shall be a confidential enquiry and shall not be open to the public or press. In case after the memorialists lay all facts, you feel that any explanation is necessary from any person concerned, you may confidentially call for such explanations. Your Headquarters for the purpose shall be Delhi, but if you need looking into any official records of the State of Orissa, you may for the purpose come to Bhubaneshwar. You may also come to Bhubaneshwar for the purpose of the enquiry as and when you deem it proper.
The Advocate-General, Orissa has been authorised to assist you in the enquiry on behalf of the State Government."
On 8th of May, 1968 Sri Mudholkar wrote a letter (Annexure 'B') to Sri Dinabandhu Sahu, Advocate for the memorialists. The material parts of this letter may be extracted :
"xx xx xx
This inquiry shall be of a confidential nature and shall not be open to the public or the press.
Xx xx xx
It is possible that you may like to clarify or further particularise some of the allegations made against the Chief
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
