Back
2009 Supreme(Ori) 505
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
R.N. Biswal, B.P. Das, JJ.
SRI P. SATYANARAYAN PATRO - APPELLANT
Versus
ORISSA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD. - RESPONDENT
Decided On : 26-02-2009
The judgment establishes the importance of adhering to pension rules, providing a reasonable opportunity for defense, and ensuring consistency in disciplinary findings.
Headnote:
Pension Reduction - Disciplinary Proceedings - Orissa Civil Services (Pension) Rules - Rule 7(2)(b)(ii) - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a retired Sub-Assistant Engineer, challenged the reduction of his pension due to alleged irregularities during his service. The charges related to negligence in duty and lack of supervision, leading to financial loss and interruption in power transmission.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the initiation of disciplinary proceedings after the retirement of the petitioner to be illegal and in violation of the Orissa Civil Services (Pension) Rules. It also noted the lack of proper opportunity for the petitioner to defend himself and highlighted the inconsistency in the disciplinary authority's findings.
Issues: 1. Validity of disciplinary proceedings after retirement. 2. Adequacy of opportunity for defense. 3. Consistency in disciplinary authority's findings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the initiation of disciplinary proceedings after retirement, for events occurring more than four years prior, was in violation of the Pension Rules. It emphasized the importance of providing a reasonable opportunity for defense and highlighted the need for consistency in disciplinary findings.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, quashing the orders for pension reduction.
JUDGMENT :
R.N. Biswal, J. - In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order of punishment passed by opp.party as per Annexure-11 directing 20% of his pension to be reduced permanently, and the order of the appellate authority confirming the same under Annexure-13.
2. As per the writ petition, having been duly selected, the . petitioner was appointed as Sub-Assistant Engineer (Electrical) on 13.1.1975 by the Chief Engineer, Orissa State Electricity Board, Bhubaneswar and retired from service on superannuation from GRIDCO on 31.3.2003. After "his retirement, opp.party No. 1 served with a charge sheet on the gro.und that while he was working as Junior Engineer at Bhanjanagar Sub-Division for the period 9.12.1981 to 28.8.1990, he committed the following irregularities:
(1) Negligence in duty to lack of proper supervision of construction work of the tower;
(2) Caused heavy financial loss to OSEB/GRIDCO;
(3) Gross misconduct;
3. It was alleged that due to his negligence, during construction of EHT towers, on Bhanjanagar-Chandaka 220 K.V. Double Circuit Lines EHT tower Nos. 178 and 179 got uprooted on 2.6.2003. During investigation, by a committee, to find out the cause of such uprooting, it was observed that with reference to the drawing No. 1593-A for P+O type tower the stub was required to be embedded inside the concrete up to bottom of pyramid, but it was found that no portion of pyramid concrete came dut of the monolithic with the stub. In other words, about 0.8 cum of concrete was only available as against the requirement of 3.34 per tower as provided in the drawing. Entry in the M.B. Book was made showing execution of full specified quantities as per drawing and not as per actual work done at site, for which, the towers were made weak to withstand gusty wind. Normally, the stub should be symmetrically placed inside the chimney and pyramid. But in the present case, it was found that the same was eccentrically placed indicating poor workmanship. The quantity of concrete was not properly checked and the quality and proportion were not homogenous as found from the test sample. A 1:2:4 concrete mix would normally give strength between 150 to 175 kg/m2. But three samples which were tested varied widely indicating non-homogeneity. The soil condition at the site being semi-submerged soil, it required about 12 cum of concrete volume per tower. The volume in dry condition is 3.36 cum. From the above facts, it was alleged that the petitioner failed to adopt the design as per the site condition. It was also alleged that he did not properly supervise the work for ensuring quantity and quality of materials which led to poor condition of towers. Because of all these factors the two towers in question got up-rooted causing interruption in power transmission, beside causing huge financial loss amounting crores of rupees to GRIDCO/Government.
4. The petitioner was asked to submit his written statement of defence within 15 days from issue of charge sheet. Accordingly, he filed the written statement of defence denying the charges, wherein, he categorically stated that he was assigned with supervision of EHT construction work like survey, excavation of pits, erection of towers with other ancillary works relating to EHT line from Bhanjanagar to Nayagarh. On his supervision 180 number of EHT towers were constructed. The said works were done departmentally under supervision of S.D.O., Executive Engineer, Superintending Engineer and the Chief Engineer. He supervised the tower foundation location Nos. 178 and 179 while being constructed as per the direction of the superior officials. The S.D.O. was also present during execution of those works. It is the further case of the petitioner that the volume of concrete available in CET to be 0.8 cum pre leg, instead of 3.36 cum. At the rate of 0.8 cum per leg for four legs it would be.3.63 cum. So, the volume of concrete available was exact as per the entry made in M.B. for location Nos. 178 and 1
