The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.11930 of 2024 Kabira Prasad Rout ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - SanjibMohanty -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Legal Reasoning
Represented By Adv. – Mr. N.K. Praharaj, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 13.05.2024 This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Order No. 01. 1. 2. counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers:- “Under such circumstances, it is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to admit this case and issue notice to the opposite parties to file their show cause as to why the case of the petitioner shall not be allowed and after hearing the parties, the case of the petitioner be allowed. And necessary order be passed to set aside the proceeding initiated the against the petitioner vide Annexure-1 dtd:29.12.2023. and petitioner be given Page 1 of 4. all other financial and consequential benefit. And/or pass any other order(s) which deem fit and proper for adjudication of the case.” 4. The Petitioner has approached this Court for quashing the entire disciplinary proceeding on the ground that the Petitioner has not been supplied with copies of the documents basing upon which charges have been framed vide memo of charges dated 29.12.2023 under Annexure- 1 to the writ application. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that although the Petitioner has been served with a copy of the memorandum as well as the articles of charges and the memo of evidence. However, the document which the department wants to utilize against the present Petitioner, as has been narrated in the memo of evidence, has not been supplied to the present Petitioner. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that such a conduct on the part of Opposite Parties in not supplying the copies of the documents likely to be used against the present petitioner in the departmental proceeding grossly violates the principles of natural justice. He further contended that observance of principle of natural justice and providing a reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner to defend himself is the basic requirement of any disciplinary proceeding as has been contemplated under Article-311 of the Constitution of India. In course of his argument he also referred to the judgment in the case of Kashinath Dikshita v. Union of India reported in AIR 1986 SC 2118. By referring to the aforesaid judgment learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that in the said reported judgment the Petitioner was dismissed from service on being found guilty in a disciplinary proceeding. However, ultimately the Hon’ble Supreme Court felt that since the Petitioner was not provided with a reasonable opportunity to defend himself by supplying him copies of the Page 2 of 4. documents used against the Petitioner, it was held that the disciplinary proceeding is violative in Article 311 (2) and as such the same is unsustainable in law. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand referring to the notice dated 22.04.2024 under Annexure-5 submitted before this Court that the Petitioner has been given an opportunity of hearing and he has been asked to appear before the disciplinary authority on 15.05.2024 along with his supporting documentary evidence in support of his defence against the charges levied against the Petitioner and for further continuance of the disciplinary proceeding initiated under Rule 15 of the OCS (CCA) Rules, 1962. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that it is open to the Petitioner to raise the ground of non- supply of documents before the disciplinary authority on the date and time fixed for appearance of the Petitioner pursuant to the notice dated 22.04.2024 under Annexure-5 to the writ application. 6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as materials on record, this Court is of the considered view that the only issue involved in the present writ application with regard to observance of the principles of natural justice while conducting the disciplinary proceeding against the present Petitioner as contemplated under Article-311(2) of the Constitution of India. It further appears that the departmental authorities are going to rely on certain documentary evidence which has been narrated in detail in the memo of evidence attached to the memo of charges. However, according to the counsel for the Petitioner, the copies of such documents have not been provided to the Petitioner. Therefore, the Petitioner is not in a position to defend himself since he has been deprived of a reasonable opportunity to Page 3 of 4. defend himself in the enquiry as contemplated vide notice dated 22.04.2024 under Annexure-5 to the writ application. Taking into consideration the limited nature of the grievance involved in the present writ application as well as the contentions raised by learned counsels appearing for the parties, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to raise the issue of non-supply of documents before the competent authority on 15.05.2024 pursuant to the notice dated 22.04.2024 under Annexure-5 to the writ application. In such eventuality, the disciplinary authority shall verify as to whether the copies of the documents, likely to be relied upon by the departmental authorities, have been supplied to the Petitioner. In the event the copies of the documents have not been supplied as alleged by the Petitioner, necessary steps be taken expeditiously by the Opposite Parties to provide the Petitioner with copies of the documents as has been referred to in the memo of evidence attached to the memo of charge under Anneure-1 to the writ application before finalizing the enquiry pursuant to the notice dated 22.04.2024 under Annexure-5 to the writ application. 7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge S.K. Rout Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 14-May-2024 18:07:21 Page 4 of 4.