Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Narasingha Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing of the case (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. contentions regarding procedural irregularities (Para 3) |
| 3. response by respondent's counsel (Para 4) |
| 4. further contentions by petitioner (Para 5) |
| 5. court observations on procedural compliance (Para 6) |
| 6. court's order and directions (Para 7) |
Judgment:
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.
1. Heard Mr. B. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.P. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dated 29.11.2024, so issued by Opp. Party No.2 under Annexure-13. Vide the said order, while disposing the proceeding, Opp. Party No.2 being the disciplinary authority, passed the order of punishment by directing recovery of a sum of Rs.6,51,039.13/- along with simple interest @ 18%.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the proceeding in question was initiated vide Memorandum dated 04.11.1994 under Annexure-2. Initially without supplying the enquiry report, when the proceeding was disposed of, with passing of an order of punishment, the matter was carried to this Court in W.P.C(OAC) No.1852 of 2009. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Cou
Disciplinary proceedings against a retired government servant must comply with statutory requirements, including issuing a second show-cause notice and following appropriate rules for post-retirement....
Failure to issue a second show-cause notice as required by Rule 15(10)(i)(b) invalidates the disciplinary punishment, emphasizing adherence to procedural fairness.
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to statutory procedures; failure to follow these renders resultant penalties unsustainable.
The District Education Officer's order imposing penalty post-retirement was contrary to the Orissa Civil Services (Pension) Rules, as validity lies solely with the State Government after retirement.
Disciplinary action requires compliance with procedural rules; failure to conduct an enquiry renders the imposition of penalties invalid.
Departmental proceedings against a retired employee cannot be initiated more than four years after the relevant event, as per Rule 7(2)(b)(ii) of OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992.
Disciplinary proceedings against government employees must be conducted fairly, based on adequate evidence, and require reasoned decisions to uphold the principles of natural justice.
Pension rights cannot be revoked without adherence to due process, ensuring legal and procedural fairness in disciplinary proceedings, especially when misconduct charges remain pending.
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
