The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.21943 of 2022 Santosh Kumar Rana Petitioner Mr. Biren Sankar Tripathy, Adv. …. -versus- The Appeal Committee, High Court of Orissa, Cuttack and Ors. …. Respondent Mr. D.K. Mishra, AGA CORAM: MR. JUSTICE D. DASH DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No. ORDER 24.08.2023 02. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement (virtual / physical) mode. 2. This matter was not listed today. On being mentioned, this matter is taken up through Special Notice. 3. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner challenges the Minutes of the Meeting of the Appeal Committee/ Opposite Party No.1 held in Judges Longue, 3rd Floor of New Building of this Court on 01.12.2021, by which the Appeal filed by him was dismissed.
Legal Reasoning
4. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 5. The fact of the case is that the Petitioner while serving as Junior Typist in the office of the learned Additional Page 1 of 8 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 01-Sep-2023 10:54:38 // 2 // Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-S.D.J.M., Hindol, a disciplinary proceeding bearing D.P. No.01 of 2013 was initiated against one Bikram Kumar Sahoo, Junior Clerk (Comparing Clerk) and the present Petitioner by the Opposite Party No.2/ District and Sessions Judge-cum- Disciplinary Authority, Dhenkanal directing them to file reply to the show cause on the charges as follows:- “While you both are working as Jr. Typist and Comparing Clerk respectively in the court of the Addl. Civil Judge (JD)-cum-SDJM, Hindol one copy application was filed bearing No.78/2012 for issuance of certified copy of judgment dtd.25.05.2000 passed in Criminal Appeal No.78/1990 by the Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal, Angul and the said certified copy was prepared through Xerox process out of the copy of the judgment available in the lower court record i.e. GR 106/1989 wherein some letters/ sentences were missing. Preparing certified copy from a copy is not permissible under law, but both of you have certified the copy from out of a copy knowingly which amounts to gross negligence and dereliction of duty on your part. You are therefore directed to submit your Show-cause by 26.03.2023 as to why you both shall not be punished in the event of the above charge being proved against you, failing which it will be deemed that you have no Show-cause to offer and the matter will be decided exparte. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 01-Sep-2023 10:54:38 Page 2 of 8 // 3 // You are required to state in your Show-cause, if you want to be heard in person” 6. In response to the said memorandum of charges, the Petitioner submitted his explanation stating therein that he was entrusted with the Xerox work in addition to his own duties. For the first time without having any prior knowledge and experience, he had prepared the Xerox copy. He had no malafide intention in preparing the same. Being a new comer, he had no thorough practical experience about the copying work with rules and regulations. Therefore, he begged apology and prayed to exonerate him from the charges. He undertook not to commit such type of mistake in future. 7. Thereafter, the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority issued notice dated 13.05.2013 directing the Petitioner to appear in person before him on 07.06.2013 and explain as to why the penalties envisaged under clause (iii), (iv), (vi) to (ix) of Rule-13 of the Orissa Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1962 (hereinafter after referred to as “ OCS (CCA) Rules” for brevity) shall not be imposed on him. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 01-Sep-2023 10:54:38 Page 3 of 8 // 4 // 8. In response to the said notice dated 13.05.2013 of the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority, the Petitioner appeared before the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority with a prayer to excuse him and exempt from imposition of the proposed penalties on 07.06.2013. 9. Thereafter, the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority passed the order dated 07.06.2013 imposing punishment of withholding/ stopping one annual increment with cumulative effect. He was further warned to be very careful in future while dealing with such matters. 10. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner had filed an Appeal before the Opposite Party No.1/ Appeal Committee with a prayer to set aside the order of punishment dated 07.06.2013 passed by the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority and to exonerate him from the charges. 11. The Appeal Committee dismissed the Appeal filed by the Petitioner vide Minutes of the Meeting dated 01.12.2021 confirming the order of punishment dated 07.06.2013 passed by the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority. Being aggrieved by the Minutes of the Meeting dated 01.12.2021 of the Appeal Committee, the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. Page 4 of 8 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 01-Sep-2023 10:54:38 // 5 // 12. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Appeal Committee has dismissed the Appeal preferred by the Petitioner confirming the order of punishment passed by the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority without considering any of the grounds taken in the appeal. 13. He further submits that the Appeal Committee while considering the Appeal has lost sight of the fact that the Petitioner had only prepared the photo copy, which was compared by the comparing Clerk and, thereafter, the certified copy was granted by the Bench Clerk/ Clerk-in- Charge. However, proceedings were initiated against the Petitioner as well as the Junior Clerk (Comparing Clerk), but no proceedings was initiated against the Bench Clerk/ Clerk- in-Charge, who is also responsible for issuance of the certified copy. Therefore, the conclusion arrived at by the Appeal Committee was not just and proper. 14. It is further submitted that the punishment imposed on the Petitioner is highly disproportionate to the charges leveled against him. The disciplinary authority should have warned the petitioner instead of stopping one annual increment with cumulative effect taking into account the fact that the Petitioner was a new entrant to the Copying Section and quite ignorant about the rules and regulations of preparing of copy and has admitted Page 5 of 8 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 01-Sep-2023 10:54:38 // 6 // the fault as being ignorant of the rules and regulations then. Besides, even though the Petitioner prepared the photo copy, but the certified copy was granted by the Bench Clerk/ Clerk-in-Charge. He further submits that the Appeal Committee without considering the said aspect have come to a wrong conclusion by confirming the order passed by Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority. Therefore, the Minutes of the Appeal Committee dated 01.12.2021 under Annexure-7 is liable to be quashed.
Legal Reasoning
15. In view of the above, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Minutes of the Appeal Committee dated 01.12.2021 under Annexure-7 and the order of punishment dated 07.06.2013 passed by the Opposite Party No.2/ disciplinary authority may be quashed and direction may be issued to the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority to exonerate the Petitioner from the charges with warning. 16. In reply, learned counsel for the State submits that the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority as well as the Appeal Committee have considered all the aspects relevant for the purpose of imposition of punishment on the Petitioner. There is no cogent reason to interfere with the same. He, therefore, contended that this Writ Petition should be dismissed. Page 6 of 8 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 01-Sep-2023 10:54:38 // 7 // 17. It appears from the record that the Petitioner has committed the mistake in view of the fact that he was entrusted with the Xerox work in addition to his own duties. For the first time without having any prior knowledge and experience, he had prepared the Xerox copy. He had no malafide intention in preparing the same. Being a new comer, he had no thorough practical experience about the copying work with rules and regulations. Therefore, he begged apology and prayed to exonerate him from the charges. He undertook not to commit such type of mistake in future. But the error committed by the Petitioner for all these above cannot be so lightly brushed aside and condoned considering it to be a petty one. Therefore, there is no hesitation on our part to go with the finding of the Appeal Committee confirming one rendered by the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority. 18. Therefore, having considered the contentions made by the learned counsel for the Parties and on applying our judicious mind carefully on the materials available on records so also the provisions of law, this Court is of the view that the penalty imposed by the Opposite Party No.2/disciplinary authority vide its order dated 07.06.2013 which has been confirmed by the Appeal Committee/ Page 7 of 8 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 01-Sep-2023 10:54:38 // 8 // Opposite Party No.1 in the Minutes of its Meeting dated 01.12.2021 withholding/ stopping one annual increment on the Petitioner with cumulative effect is disproportionate and need be revisited. 19. In such view of the matter, this Writ Petition is allowed in-part insofar the imposition of penalty is concerned. Accordingly, the penalty imposed is modified to the extent that one increment of the Petitioner be withheld/ stopped without cumulative effect.
Decision
20. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. . (D. Dash) Judge Judge (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) B.Jhankar Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 01-Sep-2023 10:54:38 Page 8 of 8