Advocates:
['A G A', 'M/S JAYSANKAR MISHRA', '', 'KAMALAKANTA MOHANTY', 'HARISANKAR MISHRA']

12. 15.11.2018

Heard Mr. R.K. Mohapatra, learned Government

Advocate for the petitioner-State.

By

way

of

this

petition,

petitioner-State

has

challenged the order dated 9.3.1999 passed by the Orissa

Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in O.A. No. 2087 of

1992, whereby the order of the authority dated 7.9.1992, by

which the applicant (opposite party herein) was awarded with

the punishment of reversion from the higher post to lower post,

was set aside.

We have gone through the impugned order of the

Tribunal in details. The learned Tribunal at paragraphs 4 to 6

has clearly observed as under:

<4. Annexure-10 does not show that the additional

charges were framed in a separate proceeding.

Earlier eight charges were framed. The inquiring

officer found that all the eight charges were proved.

Thereafter, this additional charge was framed in the

same proceeding after the inquiry report was

submitted. This, in my opinion, is in clear violation of

rules. Once an inquiry is completed and punishment

awarded, no additional charges can be framed in the

same proceeding unless the disciplinary authority

remands the same to the inquiring offi