The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.20975 of 2024 Ranjan Kumar Sharma ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - Jyotirmay Gupta -versus- ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – Ms. B.Sahu, A.G.A. 1) State Of Odisha 2) Director, Panchayati Raj And Drinking Water 3) Collector Cum Chairman, Zilla Parishad, Kendrapara 4) C.d.o. Cum E.o., Zilla Parishad, Kendrapara 5) Block Development Officer
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 08.04.2025 05. 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 State-Opposite Parties. Perused the pleadings of respective parties as well as documents annexed thereto. 3. By filing the present writ application the petitioner has sought for quashing of the disciplinary proceeding pending against him which was initiated by the disciplinary authority i.e. Collector-cum- Chairman, Zila Parisad, Kendrapara, Opposite Party No.3 along with a further prayer for a direction to the opposite parties to treat the Page 1 of 5. suspension period as on-duty and then to disburse the withheld salary from the period 17.12.2019 to 02.01.2020 within a stipulated period of time. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset contended that on 17.12.2019, the petitioner submitted a leave application before the competent authority and thereafter on 23.12.2019 submitted a leave application supported by medical certificate. The Collector-cum- Chairman, Zila Parisad, Kendrapara, vide order dated 03.01.2020, placed the petitioner under suspension pending the initiation of disciplinary proceeding on the ground of negligence of duty, carelessness and disobedience of order of authority. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Opposite Party No.3 by filing a representation on 18.06.2020 for re-consideration of his decision. Since that was not taken up, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.16937 of 2020 which was disposed of by a coordinate bench on 02.09.2020 directing the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that his representation was disposed of vide order dated 03.02.2021 and the petitioner was reinstated in service. The B.D.O., Rajnagar was directed to release the pending allowance in favour of the petitioner. Further, another direction was given to the disciplinary authority for framing of charge in the disciplinary proceeding pending against the petitioner. After his reinstatement he was posted at Garadapur Block. While the matter stood thus, the petitioner once again approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.29194 of 2023 which was disposed of by a coordinate bench of this Court on 18.09.2023 with a direction to the opposite party No.3 i.e. Collector-cum-Chairman, Zila Parisad, Page 2 of 5. Kendrapara to ensure that his order dated 03.02.2021 is complied with, within seven days. Since the order passed in the earlier writ application was not complied with the petitioner was compelled to file a contempt application bearing CONTC No.826 of 2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner further disputed the facts stated in Para-11 of the compliance affidavit filed by the Opposite Parties-Contemnors. In the meantime the petitioner submitted his reply to the show cause on 23.12.2019, under Annexure-9 to the writ application. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture further contended that, due to the pendency of the disciplinary proceeding the petitioner is not getting his arrear salaries and other service benefits as is due and admissible to him and that the disciplinary proceeding is being unnecessarily prolonged by the authorities to harass the present petitioner. Being aggrieved by such conduct of the opposite parties in unnecessarily prolonging in the disciplinary proceeding the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand, referring to the counter affidavit filed by the Opposite Party No.5, contended that steps have been taken to dispose of the disciplinary proceeding pending against the present petitioner. She further contended that, the prayer with regard to payment of arrear salary for suspension period cannot be entertained at this juncture as the disciplinary proceeding is still pending. So far the subsistence allowances is concerned, the same has already been released in favour of the present petitioner. She further contended that pursuant to the order passed by the disciplinary authority the petitioner has already been reinstated in service and is getting his current salary. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State submitted that present writ application is Page 3 of 5. devoid of merit and accordingly, the same should be dismissed at the threshold. 7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as materials on record, it is observed that the only hurdle faced by the petitioner in getting his financial benefits is the pending disciplinary proceeding. On perusal of the record, it appears that though the proceeding was initiated in January, 2020, however the same is still pending for final adjudication. By taking into consideration the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he ought to be provided with an opportunity to furnish any further reply as well as documents in support of his stand before the disciplinary authority in the pending disciplinary proceeding, in the larger interests of justice this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application by directing the disciplinary authority i.e. Collector-cum-Chairman, Zila Parisad, Kendrapara,, Opposite Party No.3 to dispose of the pending disciplinary proceeding within a period of two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order. It is further made clear that the disciplinary authority shall provide opportunity to the petitioner put forth his case in the shape of additional reply along with other supporting documents and in such eventuality the petitioner shall file the same within a period of ten days from the date of hearing of the petitioner, and by entire proceeding shall be concluded within a period of two months as has been directed hereinabove, failing which, the disciplinary proceeding shall be construed to have been dropped. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be paid with the financial and service benefit as is due and admissible to him forthwith. Page 4 of 5. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. Rubi ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Page 5 of 5. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 10-Apr-2025 16:54:02