JUDGMENT :

S.N. Prasad, J.

This writ petition is by the State of Orissa assailing the order passed by Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in O.A. No.733 of 2012 dtd.24.03.2015 whereby and where under the Tribunal after quashing the order of punishment has directed the authorities to proceed with the enquiry afresh after supplying the documents in accordance with the provision under Rule 15(3) of the Orissa Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1962 (herein after referred to as the Rules, 1962).

2. The brief fact for the case is that opposite party no.1 was appointed as Special Land Acquisition Officer, Daitari Bansapani Rail Link Project, Keonjhar, appointed as Land Acquisition Officer and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Officer, Kanpur Major Irrigation Project, Kanpur in addition of his own duty vide order dtd.26.10.98. The Special Land Acquisition Officer and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Officers are declared as Appointing Authority in respect of class-III and class-IV staff borne under the Water Resources Department and working in various offices. The opposite party no.1 being the head of office and discharging the duty of Land Acquisition Collector under the administrative control of Water Resources Department, appointed three Amins and one Chairman on 89 days basis as per the instruction of the Collector, Keonjhar for smooth management of the day to day work, subsequently 6 Amins and Chairman were redeployed to the office of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Mahanadi-Chitroptala Island Irrigation Project, Cuttack as per the order of the Government in the Water Resources Department. The Collector, Keonjhar had also appointed some persons to perform their duties in the aforesaid organization. The Government in their letter dtd.1.10.2001 directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Officer to relieve the staff of Collectorate, accordingly, 13 employees were relieved. The Collector, Keonjhar being aggrieved by such action of the opposite party no.1 made some allegation against him, on the basis of which, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated vide memo or charge dtd.07.11.2002 and he was called upon to submit his written statement of defence. The opposite party no.1 had submitted his written defence denying the charges, being not satisfied with the written statement of defence, Inquiring Officer was appointed.

The charges were enquired into and after conclusion of the enquiry, the Inquiring Officer submitted his report holding the applicant guilty of the charges. The applicant thereafter was called upon to submit his representation on the finding of the Inquiring Officer, accordingly he submitted the same, the disciplinary authority had issued notice to show cause on 21.06.2008 on the proposed punishment without supplying the statement of the disciplinary authority as required under Rule 15(1)(b) of the Rules, 1962, he had submitted his show cause reply against the proposed punishment with a prayer to give him opportunity to be heard in person and allow him to adduce further evidence to defend the charges.

The opposite party no.1 had approached the Tribunal vide O.A. No.91 of 2009 assailing the proposed punishment, the Tribunal has directed the authorities to consider the show cause of the applicant and to give him opportunity of being heard in person before passing final order, he was called upon for personal hearing and ultimately the petitioner has made request to supply certain documents which were not supplied to him and as such the opposite party no.1 had challenged the second show cause notice before the Tribunal again by filing O.A. No.271 of 2010 wherein the Tribunal had directed to pass a speaking order within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of show cause which he will submit, thereafter the disciplinary authority proceeded to conclude the enquiry by imposing punishment vide order no.1294 dtd.23.6.2012 whereby and where under the punis