The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C)(OAC) No.2521 of 2017 Ramesh Kumar Beura …. Petitioner Mr. G.R. Sethi, Advocate -versus- Registrar, Cooperative Societies & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Samal, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 20.02.2024 Order No 09. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Mr. G.R. Sethi, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. S.K. Samal, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. The deceased Petitioner initially filed the present writ petition challenging the order of punishment passed against him vide office order dtd.18.08.2005 under Annexure-5 and order passed by the appellate authority on 14.07.2017 under Annexure-8. Vide order under Annexure-5, the deceased Petitioner was dismissed from Govt. service w.e.f.18.08.2005. The said order has been upheld by the appellate authority vide order dtd.14.07.2017 under Annexure- 8. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that deceased Petitioner while continuing as an Ex-Secretary, Hindol Road, PGCS & MCH Ltd., a proceeding was initiated against him vide Proceeding No. 2006 dtd.22.04.1998 under Annexure-1. It is // 2 // contended that the deceased Petitioner after receipt of the memorandum of charges though moved an application under Annexure-2 with a request to provide various documents for the purpose of submission of the written statement of defence, but the same was never provided to him. Accordingly, the deceased Petitioner from the very beginning of the proceeding was prejudiced due to non-supply of the documents. 4.1. It is also contended that for the self same allegation Petitioner was also proceeded with in a criminal proceeding in GR Case No. 644 of 1998 before the learned CJM, Dhenkanal. Vide Judgment dtd.31.03.2005 under Annexure-9 series Petitioner when was convicted and sentenced to undergo SI for 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, Petitioner challenging the order of conviction and sentence, filed Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2005 before the learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal. Learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal vide Judgment dtd.21.11.2013 acquitted the Petitioner from the criminal charges. 4.2. It is contended that since for the self same charges, Petitioner was also proceeded with in the criminal proceeding in which he was ultimately acquitted vide Judgment dtd.21.11.2013, the ground on which the deceased Petitioner was dismissed from his services vide order dtd.18.08.2005 under Annexure-5, so confirmed by the appellate authority vide order dtd.14.07.2017 under Annexure-8 are not sustainable in the eye of law. It is also contended that during the pendency of the writ petition before this Court the original employee since died, his legal heirs have now been substituted. 5. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand made his submission basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit. It is Page 2 of 5 // 3 // contended that deceased Petitioner was proceeded with vide proceeding dtd.22.04.1998 under Annexure-1 on various grounds and the criminal proceeding was only initiated with regard to the misappropriate of a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- by the deceased Petitioner. It is contended that as found from the memo of charges issued under Annexure-1, the deceased Petitioner was charged on different counts and one of the charge is with regard to misappropriate of a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/-. 5.1. It is also contended that in the criminal proceeding the trial court initially passed the order of conviction and sentence by convicting the deceased Petitioner to undergo SI for 4 years. But the appellate authority on a technical plea passed the order of acquittal vide Judgment dtd.21.11.2013 under Annexure-10. However, it is contended that since the charges in the disciplinary proceeding and criminal proceeding are not same, the stand taken by the deceased Petitioner that for the self same charges the criminal proceeding was initiated is not acceptable. It is also contended that Petitioner after being served with the memorandum when made an application under Annexure-2 for supply of various documents, Petitioner after receipt of the same filed his written explanation vide Annexure-C/1 to the counter. In the said reply Petitioner clearly admitted that the deceased Petitioner was provided with all the documents and he was also allowed to peruse various records and papers for the purpose of filing his written explanation. The relevant portion of the stand taken by the deceased Petitioner in his written explanation vide Annexure-C/1 is reproduced hereunder:- “However, I have received copies of certain relevant documents through letter No. 2767 dt.1-8-2001 of the A.R.C.S., Dhenkanal on 20-8-2001, on receipt of such Page 3 of 5 // 4 // documents I have stated preparation of my written explanation by perusing the records/papers supplied to me and it is anticipated that I may complete my written explanation within a period of one month hence.” 5.2. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate accordingly contended that the deceased Petitioner was not only provided with all documents but also the proceeding was conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions and after finding the Petitioner guilty of the charges, the order of punishment of dismissal was passed under Annexure-5 so confirmed by the appellate authority under Annexure-8. 6. To the submission made by learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that since the criminal proceeding and disciplinary proceeding was initiated on self same charges, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., (2024) 1 SCC 175, the order of punishment passed under Annexure-5 so confirmed under Annexure-8 are required to be interfered with. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and after going through the materials available on record, this Court finds that the deceased Petitioner was proceeded with in proceeding dtd.22.04.1998 under Annexure-1. Even though the deceased Petitioner vide Annexure-2 made a request for supply of various documents, but as found from Annexure-C/1, the deceased Petitioner himself admit about receipt of the documents and after receipt of the same, he filed his written explanation on 25.09.2001. Therefore, the stand taken by the deceased Petitioner that he was not supplied with the documents is not acceptable to this Court. With regard to the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that for the self same charges since the Petitioner was proceeded in a criminal proceeding and he was acquitted by the Page 4 of 5 // 5 // learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal vide Judgment dtd.21.11.2013 under Annexure-10 and accordingly he is entitled to get the benefit of the Judgment passed in the case of Ram Lal as cited supra, this Court finds that the deceased Petitioner was charged on different counts in the proceeding dtd.22.04.1998 and one of the charge is with regard to misappropriate of a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/-, for which the criminal proceeding was initiated and in which the deceased Petitioner was ultimately acquitted on a technical plea. Since it is found that the deceased Petitioner was charged on different counts in the disciplinary proceeding and the criminal proceeding only on the change of misappropriation of Rs. 7,00,000/-, the stand taken by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that for the self same charges the deceased Petitioner was proceeded with in the criminal proceeding is also not acceptable. In that view of the matter and taking into account the nature of charges framed against the deceased Petitioner, this Court finds no illegality or irregularity with the impugned order of punishment passed under Annexure-5 so confirmed under Annexure-8 and decline to interfere with the same.
Decision
8. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Sneha Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 26-Feb-2024 12:06:45 Page 5 of 5