The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to adhere to the principles of natural justice and the prescribed procedure in conducting enquiries, failure of which can lead to the quashing of disciplinary orders.

PRADEEP KANT, K. N. OJHA, J.

( 1 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Pankaj Kumar Singh and Sri vijay Jeet Lal Verma for the State.

( 2 ) RECORD of the enquiry has also been produced before us.

( 3 ) THE short question canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that though the petitioner was served with two charge-sheets but without giving him any opportunity to participate in the enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted his report, on the basis of which the impugned order of dismissal from service has been passed.

( 4 ) INITIALLY the appointing authority, on consideration of the enquiry report and reply submitted to the show cause notice and the enquiry report by the petitioner, passed an order of minor punishment, namely, (i) no payment of salary beyond subsistence allowance for the period under which the petitioner remained under suspension; (ii)stoppage of three annual increments temporarily and (iii) a censure entry to be recorded in his service book. This order was passed on June 30, 2001. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred a departmental appeal and the appellate authority enhanced the aforesaid punishment after issuing notice to the petitioner, inflicting upon him punishment of dismissal from service. This order is dated February 17, 2003.

( 5 ) THE enquiry report has been brought on record, which says that the first charge-sheet was dated April 20, 1999 and the second charge-sheet was dated October 23, 1999 and that charge- sheet dated April 20, 1999, was replied by the petitioner on March 31, 2001 and in the meantime he had made request for supply of the copy of relevant documents and also for inspection. The petitioner though mentioned that he would give list of the persons whom he wanted to cross-examine but he did not give any such list. The enquiry report says that the documents in respect of charge-sheet dated october 23, 1999 were given to him and the concerned documents were inspected by him.

( 6 ) THE enquiry report also says that the charged officer demanded for personal hearing and, therefore, on his demand April 10, 2001 was fixed for the purpose. Thereafter, the enquiry officer on the basis of the charges levelled and perusing the record and examining the replies submitted by the petitioner, treating the opportunity given on April 10, 2001 as an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, submitted his report on May 15, 2001. From the enquiry report it is evident that except April 10, 2001, no other date was fixed for conducting the enquiry nor any date, time and place was fixed by the enquiry officer nor intimation was given to the petitioner for participation in the enquiry. This fact also finds support from the enquiry record, which we have gone through with the assistance of Sri vijay Jeet Lal Verma, learned counsel for the state.

( 7 ) FROM the enquiry report, it appears that on April 10, 2001, the petitioner was required by the enquiry officer to say whatever he wanted to say personally and for that matter he was allowed to spill his case on a plain piece of paper. In the said paper the petitioner tried to give some explanation about the charges levelled against him in one page only. Apart from the aforesaid writing of the petitioner, there is nothing on the record of the enquiry, which would suggest that the petitioner was associated during the enquiry proceedings by the enquiry officer.

( 8 ) THE charges levelled against the petitioner in both the charge-sheets were denied by him and not only that, the statement of fact made in the enquiry report that the petitioner asked for personal hearing would necessarily mean that the charges were to be proved by the department before holding the petitioner guilty.

( 9 ) AN opportunity of personal hearing to a charged officer does not mean that immediately after submission of reply to the charge-sheet, or even if the charge-sheet has not been replied, the charged officer/official would be summoned and he

Click Here to Read the rest of this document