Ahalya Sahoo State of Odisha & Others … v. …
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 12476 of 2013 Ahalya Sahoo State of Odisha & Others ….. Vs. …... Petitioner Mr. Akshaya Kumar Pandey, Advocate Opposite Parties Mr. Ajodhya Ranjan Dash, Additional Government Advocate CORAM: MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN ORDER 19.02.2024 Order No. 10. Heard Sri Akshaya Kumar Pandey, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Sri Ajodhya Ranjan Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate. 2. Assailing the Order No.1644, dated 24.05.2013 issued by the Collector, Bhadrak, Office of the District Project Co- ordinator, Sarva Sikshya Abhiyan, Bhadrak, whereby the
Legal Reasoning
Petitioner-Smt. Ahalya Sahoo, Junior Teacher of Dhatapur Primary School under Basudevpur Block, being disengaged, the present writ petition has been filed on the plea of violation of adherence to the principles of natural justice. 3. It is stated by the Petitioner that in pursuance of selection for the post of Sikshya Sahayak, the Collector-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Bhadrak engaged the Page 1 of 8 Petitioner at Dhatapur Primary School. Accordingly, agreement was entered into. The engagement of the Petitioner was extended from time to time till 31.12.2010. However, she was deployed to function as junior teacher w.e.f. 02.01.2011 vide Order No. 9671 (1328) dated 26.11.2011 in terms of Resolution No. 18536/SME dated 19.11.2009 of Government of Odisha in School and Mass Education Department “as she has completed three years of continuous satisfactory service from her date of joining i.e. 02.01.2008”. 3.1. While she was continuing thus, Opposite Party No.8 namely, Shri Sridhara Panda, joined as Assistant Teacher being transferred from Amajio Primary School. It is alleged by the Petitioner that since said Opposite Party No.8 had been showing behavior unbecoming of a teacher, especially towards her, complaints were being submitted to the Project Co-ordinator, Basudevpur time and again. Even though inappropriate behavior of the Opposite party No.8 was brought to the notice of the superior authorities, no action was taken. However, the matter became bitter leading to slapping of the Opposite party No.8 by the Petitioner, consequent upon which Basudevpur P.S. Case No. 109/2013 was instituted under Sections 341/294/323/379 /506, IPC, which was pending in the Court of JMFC, Basudevpur. 3.2. The District Co-ordinator issued a letter to both the Petitioner as well as the Opposite Party No.8 stating that both of them quarrelled in the school premises on 15.04.2013 during Page 2 of 8 school hours, which led to foisting case for criminal intimidation and physical assault, and he requested appearance and personal hearing, where the Petitioner realizing her mistake, tendered apology. 3.3. It appears that the District Project Co-ordinator by order of the Collector basing on enquiry report furnished by the Sub- Inspector of Schools (East Circles), Basudevpur, report published in daily Sambad (Balasore Edition) dated 19.04.2013 and report of the District Inspector of Schools, Bhadrak-II took a decision to disengage Smt. Ahalya Sahoo, the Petitioner. 4. Mr. A.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the Petitioner during the course of hearing submitted that though the Petitioner tendered apology and prayed for condonation of her misdemeanour shown to her colleague on 15.04.2013, the Opposite Party No.3 having acted upon the direction of the Opposite Party No.2, proceeded to disengage her from service, which is not only disproportionate but also tainted by gross violation of principles of natural justice, inasmuch as the enquiry report was neither confronted nor were the copies of such report and other documents that formed the basis for taking the decision vide order dated 24.05.2013 (Annexure-10) supplied enabling her to submit her defence. 4.1. During the course of hearing, Mr. A. K. Pandey, learned counsel for the Petitioner filed a memo enclosing therewith certified copy of the Judgment dated 04th May, 2023 passed in Page 3 of 8 G.R. Case No.167 of 2013 (Trial No.402 of 2013, arising out of Basudevpur P.S. Case No. 108 dated 15.04.2013) by the JMFC, Basudevpur, District Bhadrak, and sought to rely on Paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of the said judgment, which read follows: “ xxx 6. xxx xxx It is a settled position of law that prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts. Keeping in mind the above settled principle let me peruse the evidences adduced from the side of the prosecution. P.W.1 i.e. the informant deposed that he knows the accused as she is a teacher at Dhatapur School, where he had worked as a teacher and due to some misunderstanding he had filed this case against the accused. During cross-examination, he stated that he does not want to proceed further in this case as the matter has been amicably settled between them outside this jurisdiction by village gentries. Further stated that he cannot remember the contents of FIR and now they are pulling well with each other. After careful scrutiny of the entire evidence available on 7. record it is found that, though the informant has proved the F.I.R as Ext. P.1. But, in this case, the contents of the same remained unproved. Law is fairly well settled that, F.I.R. is not a substantive piece of evidence and the same can only be used for the purpose of corroboration or contradiction to the maker thereof. As in the instant case, the contents of the F.I.R has not been proved, the same does not endure any benefit to the prosecution. Apart from this, the informant does not want to proceed further in this case. Thus, I found the prosecution has failed miserably to bring home the charges leveled against the accused. As such, the present accused is entitled to a clean acquittal. In the result, I hold the accused named above Smt. Ahalya 8. Sahoo not guilty the offences U/s. for commission of 341/294/323/379/506 of IPC and she is acquitted there from as per Section 255(1) of Cr.P.C. She be set at liberty forthwith and be discharged from her bail bonds if any. Her previous bail bond with surety shall remain in force for a period of six months as per U/S- 437 (A) of the Cr.P.C. No order as to disposal of any seized property is passed as nothing has been seized in this case.” Page 4 of 8 4.2. It is submitted that during the course of trial, the informant deposed before the Court to the effect that “he knows the accused as she is a teacher at Dhatapur School, where he had worked as a teacher and due to some misunderstanding he had filed this case against the accused”. Since the Petitioner–Smt. Ahalya Sahoo is found not guilty of commission of offences under Sections 341/294/323/379/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and consequently, has been acquitted in terms of Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the order dated 24th May, 2013 vide Annexure-10 issued by the District Project Co-ordinator, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Bhadrak does require revisit. 5. Mr. A.R. Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate, while referring to the counter affidavit filed by Opposite Party No. 8 to the effect that the indecent behavior and indisciplined conduct of the Petitioner cannot be forgotten or forgiven, relied on paragraph 7 thereof, which reads thus: *** *** *** “ That, in reply to her submission in para-8 of the writ petition it may be humbly submitted that the Opp. party No.03 and 04 are easily approachable for redressed of any grievance of Teachers/Junior Teachers/ Sikshya Sahayakas etc. She has never approached the Opp. party No.02, the Collector, Bhadrak on the fixed date of grievance hearing each week. So the contention of the petitioner may not be relied upon.” 5.1. Shri A.R. Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate did not, however, dispute non-supply of the enquiry report(s) furnished by the Sub-Inspector of schools (East Circle) Page 5 of 8 Basudevpur and the District Inspector of Schools, Bhadrak-II which formed the foundation for disengagement of the Petitioner. However, he submitted that at the time of taking decision on the continuance of the petitioner as teacher, the proceedings were in progress. Therefore, based on incriminating material available on record at the relevant point time, correct and rightful decision was taken by the competent authority. 5.2. Shri Ajodhya Ranjan Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate, however, in all fairness submitted that since the criminal trial has come to an end with acquittal of the petitioner taking cognizance of the fact that the opposite party No.8 conceded that on account of misunderstanding between him and the petitioner the criminal case was foisted, the competent authority on the date of taking decision had no occasion to have the Judgment of the learned JMFC. 6. Considered the submission made by counsel for the rival parties and perused the record. Taking on record the memo filed by the counsel for the Petitioner during the course of hearing, this Court finds that the enquiry report furnished by the Sub- Inspector of School, Basudevpur and the report submitted by the District Inspector of School, Bhadrak-II, utilized against the Petitioner, were not supplied nor confronted before taking drastic action against the delinquent. 6.1. It is fundamental principle that before taking action against a delinquent resulting in civil consequences, Page 6 of 8 confrontation of the documents/material collected behind back and sought to be relied upon is required to be brought to his/her notice. In absence of confrontation or supply of documents collected behind back of the Petitioner, which were sought to be utilized by the authority concerned for arriving at the conclusion, being untested material, could not be utilized against the Petitioner-delinquent. The untested material, which has adverse effect to prejudice her right leading to civil consequences, being utilized by the opposite party No.3 for the purpose of disengaging the petitioner, the impugned order cannot be sustained. This Court is, thus, persuaded to hold that no reasonable opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner, whose service has been terminated in flagrant violation of principles of natural justice. 6.2. This Court also takes cognizance of the fact that the criminal trial came to an end with acquittal of the Petitioner from charges for offences under Sections 341/294/323/379/506 of the IPC. The basis of show-cause notice issued to the Petitioner, as is apparent from the order dated 24.05.2013 (Annexure-10), was “for her Criminal intimidation inside of the School on 15.04.2013”. From the Judgment dated 4th May, 2023 delivered by the JMFC, Basudevpur, it is revealed that such charges are now obliterated and the opposite party No.8 had admitted before the trial Court that the criminal case was filed due to misunderstanding. The trial Court in the said criminal case has absolved the petitioner from the charges. Page 7 of 8 7. In fine, this Court is of the considered view that the order dated 25.04.2013 is not sustainable as the reason for disengagement of the Petitioner does not subsist. The charges levelled against the petitioner in the criminal case, being the basis for her disengagement from service, could not be proved in the trial, which resulted in acquittal of Ahalya Sahoo. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to quash Order No. 1644 dated 24.05.2013 issued by the District Project Co- ordinator, Sarva Sikshya Abhiyan, Bhadrak by order of the Collector, Bhadrak from the Office of the District Project Co- ordinator, Sarva Sikshya Abhiyan, Bhadrak and remit the matter to the Opposite Party No.2-Collector-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parisad, Bhadrak to re-consider and take appropriate decision within a period of four months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order. Needless to say, the order passed thereon shall be communicated to the Petitioner. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ
Decision
petition stands disposed of, without any order as to cost. (M.S. RAMAN) JUDGE Aswini/Suchitra Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 19-Feb-2024 18:47:53 Page 8 of 8