Back
2018 Supreme(Ori) 686
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Dr. B.R. SARANGI, J.
O.J.C. NO. 5086 OF 2000
In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Decided on 14th August, 2018.
Narayan Ch. Swain ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Orissa and others ... Opp. Parties
For Petitioner:M/s. S. Palit, L Jena, D. Biswal, C.R. Lenka, A.K. Mohapatra and J.K. Dash, Advocates.
For Opp. Parties :M/s S. Das and S. Rath, Advocates
Headnote:DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS - Non-supply of enquiry report before imposing penalty - On scrutiny of documents, it revealed that enquiry report was not supplied to the delinquent - Enquiry was not conducted by the disciplinary authority- Enquiry report was enclosed with the order of penalty - As against the specific ground in the appeal regarding non-supply of enquiry report and statement of depositions before passing the final order, the appellate authority reflected in the order that appellant admitted that he was supplied with the same by the disciplinary authority- Counter affidavit indicates that petitioner was provided with the enquiry report after passing of the final order - Held, there has been a total non-application of mind - Non-supply of enquiry report has vitiated the outcome of the proceedings, due to breach of principles of natural justice - It is left open to the authority to proceed from the stage of supply of enquiry report and to consider about the recovery of the amount, if any, before the passing of the interim order of stay of the same, in accordance with law.
JUDGMENT
Dr. B.R. SARANGI,J. - The petitioner, who was working as a Field Assistant in Orissa Forest Development Corporation Limited, Boudh Division filed this application to quash the order of recovery dated 10.10.1998 in Annexure-23, as well as the order dated 30.11.1999 in Annexure-25 rejecting the appeal.
2. The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that the petitioner joined as Field Assistant in Forest Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as “OFDC”), Boudh Division on 30.06.1990 and on the basis of the direction given by the authority, he had to supervise the works at Baghanadi ‘A’ and ‘B’ Bamboo Coups and Shikadi Bamboo Depot. The distance between two coups and the said depot was about 15 kms. Therefore on 22.01.1993, the petitioner wrote a letter to the Sub-Divisional Manager of Boudh (Commercial) Division requesting him to take appropriate step, as it was not possible on his part to look after the two coups which were at a distance of 15 kms. Such request was again made by the petitioner on 06.03.1993 and it was claimed that one temporary staff may be allowed to be posted, along with him, so that he can look after the two coups.
3. On 25.05.1993, the petitioner intimated the Sub- Divisional Manager, Boudh (Commercial) Division regarding the damage caused to the bamboo stock at Baghanadi Bamboo Coupe due to flood in the river. The petitioner received letter dated 26.07.1993 from the Divisional Manager of Boudh (Commercial) Division regarding a huge shortage of bamboo stock at the Depot and he was called upon to give his explanation within ten days. On receipt of said letter dated 26.07.1993 on 28.07.1993, the petitioner sent his detailed explanation rebutting the charges, by communication dated 05.08.1993, with a request to withdraw the allegation/charge so made against him. The Divisional Manager of Boudh (Commercial) Division issued a letter on 06.11.1993 to the petitioner alleging shortage of bamboo stock and asking for explanation. On receiving such letter, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 16.11.1993. On 09.12.1993, the petitioner submitted his physical verification report regarding the stock at Baghanadi ‘B’ for the year 1992-93. Without considering the same in proper perspective, the order dated 01.12.1993 was passed, which was received by the petitioner on 19.12.1993, whereby the petitioner was relieved from his service in OFDC to join in a private organization, namely, M/s. Straw Products Limited. The petitioner received such order on protest and filed his representation on 19.12.1993 to the Divisional Manager of Boudh (Commercial) Division through the Sub-Divisional Manager of Boudh requesting him to relieve after letting him know the terms and conditions of service in M/s. Straw Products Limited. Without intimating the terms and conditions, the petitioner was directed to join in M/s. Straw Products Limited and consequentially he was relieved from the post on 12.01.1994.
4. Under compelling circumstances, the petitioner joined the private organization immediately. Consequentially, it was not possible on his part to handover the charge of Baghanadi Bamboo Coupe to anybody else, as the payment had not been made to the people working there. Therefore, he requested the Divisional Manager of Boudh (Commercial) Division to take necessary steps for taking over the charge from him. The petitioner received a letter on 16.03.1994 from the Divisional Manager of Boudh (Commercial) Division to show the stock and handover the charge. On receipt of the letter dated 16.03.1994 on 17.03.1994, the petitioner vide letter dated 19.03.1994 requested the Divisional Manager of Boudh (Commercial) Division to grant minimum 15 days time to submit his reply on the allegation of shortage of bamboo in the said Bamboo Coupe, as he was suffering from fever. On 23.03.1994, the Divisional Manager of Boudh (Commercial) Division placed the petitioner under suspension on the allegation of disobedience of offic
