2023 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 5474
PATNA HIGH COURT
Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Jha
The Food Corporation Of india – Appellant
Versus
Ozair Alam – Respondent
L.P.A/1581/2019
The phrase 'at any time' in Regulation 74 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1971, does not give the competent authority an unlimited time frame to exercise its review power. A reasonable time limit of three years should be applied to the exercise of review power under Regulation 74.
Headnote:
REVIEW OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS - FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA (STAFF) REGULATIONS, 1971 - REGULATION 74 - INTERPRETATION - REASONABLE TIME LIMIT
Fact of the Case:
The Food Corporation of India (FCI) initiated disciplinary proceedings against three employees (respondents) and imposed a penalty of censure on them in 2014. In 2019, the competent authority, exercising its power under Regulation 74 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1971, reviewed the disciplinary authority's order and set aside the penalty of censure, remanding the matter for inquiry.
Finding of the Court:
The Patna High Court dismissed the appeal filed by FCI, upholding the Single Judge's order that the reviewing authority cannot exercise its power under Regulation 74 beyond a reasonable period of time. The court held that the phrase 'at any time' in Regulation 74 cannot be interpreted to give the competent authority an unlimited time frame to exercise its review power.
Issues: 1. Whether the reviewing authority under Regulation 74 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1971, can exercise its power beyond a reasonable period of time?2. What is the scope and interpretation of the phrase 'at any time' in Regulation 74?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Regulation 74 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1971, empowers the competent authority to review disciplinary orders 'at any time.'2. However, the court held that the phrase 'at any time' cannot be interpreted to give the competent authority an unlimited time frame to exercise its review power.3. The court reasoned that a reasonable time limit is necessary to provide certainty and finality to disciplinary proceedings and to prevent arbitrary or capricious exercise of power by the reviewing authority.4. The court held that a reasonable time limit of three years, similar to the limitation period for filing a civil suit under the Civil Procedure Code, should be applied to the exercise of review power under Regulation 74.
Final Decision: The Patna High Court dismissed the appeal filed by FCI, upholding the Single Judge's order that the reviewing authority cannot exercise its power under Regulation 74 beyond a reasonable period of time.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1581 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3325 of 2019
======================================================
1.
The Food Corporation Of India through the Chairman Cum Managing
Director, 16-20 Barakhambha Lane New Delhi.
2.
The Chairman Cum Managing Director, 16-20 Barakhambha Lane New
Delhi.
3.
The Executive Director (East Zone) Food Corporation of India, 10-A,
Middleton Row, Koklkata-71
4.
The General Manager (Region) Food Corporation of India, Regional Office,
Arunchal Building, Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
Ozair Alam S/o Late Habibur Rahman Resident of Mohalla- R.K. Nagar,
New Masjid, F.C.I. Road, Phulwarisharif, P.s.- Phulwarisharif, District-
Patna
2.
Atul Prasad Sharma S/o Late Bhagwat Singh Resident of Village- Anandpur,
P.s.- Bihta, District- Patna
3.
Sanjeev Kumar Singh S/o Vinod Prasad Singh Resident of Village-
Murgiachak, P.s.- Islampur, District- Nalanda
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s
:
Mr. P.K. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Prabhakar Tekriwal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s
:
Mr. Mukesh Kumar No. 1, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)
Date : 11-01-2023
Re: I.A. No. 1 of 2020
Heard I.A. No. 1 of 2020 for condonation of delay of
about 44 days in filing L.P.A.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1581 of 2019 dt.11-01-2023
2/4
2. For the reasons stated in the application and affidavit,
delay is condoned. I.A. stands allowed.
3. The present L.P.A. is filed against the order of the
learned Single Judge dated 16.09.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No.
3325 of 2019. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 were subjected to
disciplinary proceedings and it was concluded in imposition of
penalty of censure on 07.03.2014. The competent authority
exercised power under Regulation 74 of the Food Corporation of
India (Staff ) Regulation, 1971. Regulation 74 reads as under:
“74. Review:
(1) *(Notwithstanding anything contained in these
regulations, the Board may, at any time either on its own
motion or otherwise, call for the records of any inquiry
and review any order made under these regulations), and
(a) confirm, modify or set aside the order; or
(b) confirm, reduce, enhance or set aside the penalty
imposed by the order, or impose any penalty where no
penalty has been imposed; or
(c) Remit the case to the authority which made the order
or to any other authority directing such authority to make
such further inquiry as it may consider proper in the
circumstances of the case; or
(d) pass such other orders as it may deem fit;
**Provided that no order imposing or enhancing any
penalty shall be made by the reviewing authority unless
the employee concerned has been given a reasonable
opportunity of making a representation against the
penalty proposed and where it is proposed to impose any
of the penalties specified in clauses (v) to (ix) of
Underline Supplied
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1581 of 2019 dt.11-01-2023
3/4
Regulation 54 or to enhance the penalty imposed by the
order sought to be viewed to any of the penalties
specified in those clauses; no such penalty shall be
imposed except after an inquiry in the manner laid down
in Regulation 58.
(2) No proceeding for review shall be commenced until
after:
i) the expiry of the period of limitation for an appeal, or
ii) the disposal of the appeal, where any such appeal has
been preferred.
(3) An application for review shall be dealt with in the
same manner as if it were an appeal under these
regulations.
(4) Powers similar to those specified in clause(1) above
may be exercised by the (Chairman)*, Managing
Director, Zonal Manager (Additional)