The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) NO.40409 OF 2023 Manoranjan Patra .... Petitioner Mr. U.C. Mohanty, Adv. D.E.O, Baripada & Another -versus- ..... Opp. Parties Mr. A. Tripathy, Addl. Govt. Advocate MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY CORAM: ORDER 23.12.2024 Order No.5 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
Legal Reasoning
2. Head learned counsel for the parties. 3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 28.11.2024, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate produced the proceeding file in Court. 4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer: “The Petitioner, therefore, most humbly prays that me be graciously pleased to allow the writ petition quashing Annexures-1,9 and 12. And/or Opposite parties be directed to allow the petitioner to discharge his duty as Primary School Techer taking into Annexure-10 series.” 1 5.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that while continuing in service as a regular Primary School Teacher, a proceeding was initiated against the Petitioner vide Memorandum dt.17.03.2022 under Annexure-1. The said proceeding was initiated in terms of the provisions contained under Rule 15 of the OCS (CC & A) Rules, 1962 (in short, “The Rule”). 5.1. It is contended that Petitioner after being provided with the memorandum submitted a detailed written statement of defence on 19.04.2022 vide Annexure-2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that after filing of the written statement of defence, Inquiry Officer was appointed to enquire into the charges so framed against the Petitioner. It is contended that Petitioner when was asked to appear before the Inquiry Officer fixing his date of appearance to 02.05.2022, Petitioner appeared before the Inquiry Officer on the said date and prayed for 15 days time to attend the inquiry. 5.2. It is also contended that Petitioner along with the application dt.02.05.2022 enclosed the medical certificate issued by the concerned Medical Officer wherein the Petitioner was advised to take rest for one week. 5.3. It is contended that on the face of such application made by the Petitioner on 02.05.2022 along with the medical certificate, the Inquiry Officer fixed further date on 13.05.2022 and in absence of the Petitioner not only completed the inquiry but also submitted the inquiry report on 18.05.2022. 2 5.4. It is contended that since the proceeding was initiated under Rule 15 of the OCS (CC & A) Rules, 1962, as provided under Rule 15( 10)(i) (a) of the Rules, Petitioner was required to be provided with a copy of the inquiry report along with the 1st show-case in order to enable him to submit his representation against the finding of the Inquiry Officer. 5.5. It is contended that after receipt of the inquiry report on 18.05.2022, no such show-cause was issued to the Petitioner as provided under Rule 15(10)(i) (a) of the Rules. Not only that, prior to passing of the order of dismissal vide order dt.21.06.2022 so passed under Annexure-9, Opp. Party No.3 never issued the 2nd show-cause as provided under Rule- 15(10)(i)(b) of the Rules proposing the Punishment to be imposed on the Petitioner. 5.6. It is contended that since the statutory provisions contained under Rule 15 (10((i) (a) & (i)(b) of the Rules was never followed, the order of dismissal passed against him vide order dt.21.06.2022 under Annexure-9 is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5.7. It is also contended that challenging order of dismissal, Petitioner though preferred an appeal before Opp. Party No.2, but the said Opp. Party without proper appreciation of the grounds of appeal rejected the same vide order dt.13.10.2023 under Annexure-12. 5.8. It is contended that since the aforesaid statutory provision was never followed prior to passing of the order of 3 dismissal vide order under Annexure-9 so confirmed vide order under Annexure-12, the impugned order passed under Annexures-9 & 12 are not sustainable in the eye of law and requires interference of this Court. 6. Basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit so filed by Opp. Party No.3, when the State-Opp. Parties tried to justify the impugned order of dismissal passed under Annexure-9 so confirmed under Annexure-12, this Court in order to verify the stand of the Petitioner that Petitioner was never issued with the 1st and 2nd show-cause after submission of the Inquiry Report, called for the proceeding file with passing of the following order on 28.11.2024.
Decision
Order 28.11.2024 LA. No. 19468 of 2023 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard parties. learned counsel for the 3. This is an application with a prayer to direct the Opp. Parties-State to produce the proceeding file in respect of the vide memorandum dated 17.03.2021 under Annexure-1. proceeding initiated 4. Considering the dispute involved, this Court directs learned Addl. Govt. Advocate to produce the proceeding file with regard to the proceeding initiated 4 vide Memorandum dated 17.03.2021 on the next date. 5. I.A. is disposed of. W.P.C) No.40409 of 2023 1. As requested, list this matter on 20.12.2024. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate is directed to produce the proceeding file. Free copy to Mr. A. Tripathy, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for compliance. Pursuant to the said order, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate produced the proceeding file in Court. 7. This Court after going through the same finds that after submission of the inquiry report on 18.05.2024, no show- cause in the shape of 1st show-cause as provided under Rule 15 (10(i)(a) of the Rules was ever issued to the Petitioner. Similarly no show cause as provided under Rule 15(10)(i) (b) of the Rules was also issued proposing the punishment to be imposed on the Petitioner. 7.1. Since after going through the proceeding file, it is found that no such show-cause either 1st or 2nd was ever issued to the petition prior to passing of the order of dismissal vide order dt.21.06.2022 under Annexure-9, so confirmed by the appellate authority vide order dt.13.10.2023 under Annexure- 12, this Court on the ground of non-compliance of the statutory provisions is inclined to quash both the orders 5 issued under Annexures-9 & 12. While quashing both the orders, this Court remits the matter to the stage of inquiry. 7.2. This Court directs Opp. Party No.3 to proceed with the proceeding from the stage of inquiry and petitions be given due opportunity of hearing before the Inquiry Officer. After receipt of a fresh Inquiry report, the proceeding will be disposed of in accordance with law in which this Court expresses no opinion. The Writ Peiton accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cuttack Date: 24-Dec-2024 11:46:34 6