The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.4000 of 2025 Mukesh Bhoi ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - Chaitanya Nayak ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. - Gopinath Sethi -versus- 1) Union Of India 2) Principal Chief Security Commnr.,railway Protection Force, E. Co. Railway 3) Chief Security Commnr.,railay Protection Force, E.co.railway 4) Sr. Div. Security Commnr.,rpf, Waltair Div. 5) Asst. Security Commnr.,rpf, E.co.railway, Waltair Div. 6) Sumer Singh,inspector Cum Enquiry Officer, Rpf, Waltair Div.
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 11.02.2025 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to quash the proceeding vide Charge sheet dated 26.07.2024 the same being vague and a product of malafides. The petitioner further challenged the non-supply of Page 1 of 4. the documents including the preliminary report including the statement of Tanmay Patel, Constable; And further direction be issued to supply the documents the petitioner has prayed for including the preliminary enquiry report. And any other direction and/or directions be issued as this Hon’ble Court would deem fit & proper.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset contended that being aggrieved by the conduct of the Opposite Parties in not supplying certain documents pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the petitioner has again approached this Court by filing the present writ application. In course of his argument learned counsel for the petitioner contended that earlier the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.24960 of 2024 with a prayer to quash the proceeding vide charge sheet dated 26.07.2024, on the ground that the same is vague and malafide. The petitioner had further challenged non-supplying of the documents including the preliminary report and the statement of the Tanmay Patel, Constable. A coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 03.01.2025 after hearing the learned counsels from both sides disposed of the writ application with the following observation-: “In such view of the matter and considering the submissions made, this Court directs the authorities to share the documents as asked by the petitioner, if it is shareable within a period of fifteen days from the date of presentation of the certificate copy of this orders.” 5. After disposal of the abovenoted writ application, the petitioner again approached the Opposite Parties requesting them to supply the documents which are required by the petitioner to file an effective reply to the show cause in the pending proceeding under Annexure-13 to the writ application. Further the documents under Annexures-14 and 15 reveals that certain documents were shared with the petitioner. However, the statement of one Tanmay Patel, Constable, who happens Page 2 of 4. to be a prime witness of the Department, was not provided to the petitioner. In the reply dated 31.01.2025 under Annexure-15 to the writ application the Opposite Parties have specifically informed the petitioner that pursuant to the order passed by this Court directing the authority to share the documents as asked by the petitioner, if it is shareable, the shareable documents as demanded by the petitioner has already been supplied to the petitioner. Letter dated 31.01.2025 under Annexure-16 further categorically revealed that- “The rest of the documents are inadmissible, not up on relied or not shareable.” Therefore, it appears from the reply that the documents which have not been provided to the petitioner are not admissible and that the opposite parties are not going to rely upon such documents. 6. Mr. G.Sethi, learned counsel for the Railways on the other hand contended that pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.24960 of 2024 dated 03.01.2025, the petitioner has been supplied with the copies of the documents which are likely to be relied upon and are admissible in the disciplinary proceeding. He further contended that the documents which have not been supplied to the petitioner are not likely to be relied upon by the department in the disciplinary proceeding. In such view of the matter, letter dated 31.01.2025 which has been duly communicated to the petitioner has been filed along with the writ application as under Annexure-16. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Railways contended that the present writ application is devoid of merit and accordingly the same should be dismissed. 7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the pleadings made in the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto, further keeping in view the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both Page 3 of 4. sides, this Court observes that earlier there was a direction by this Court to provide the documents relied upon by the opposite parties in the charge sheet basing upon which the disciplinary proceeding has been initiated. The letter under Annexure-16 further reveals that certain documents have already been provided which are admissible and relied upon by the department in the charge sheet. Moreover, it has been specifically clarified that the documents which have not been provided to the petitioner are inadmissible and the same are not likely to be relied upon in the departmental proceeding. In such view of the matter, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application in terms of the letter dated 31.01.2025 further by holding that such documents which are not supplied to the petitioner are not likely to be used against the petitioner in the departmental proceeding. In the event any documents which is likely to be used against the petitioner or likely to be relied upon by the department in the pending disciplinary proceeding, the copies thereof shall be provided to the petitioner prior to the finalisation of the disciplinary proceeding by giving opportunity to the petitioner to file his reply statement of defence to such documents much before finalisation of the proceeding. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ application stands disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. Rubi ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Page 4 of 4. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 12-Feb-2025 18:55:06