STATE OF ORISSA Vs. RAM NARAYAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent was appointed in the year 1950 a Sub-Inspector on probation in the Orissa Police force. In view of the adverse reports received against him on July 28, 1954, notice was served on the respondent calling upon him to show cause why he should not be discharged from service "for gross neglect of duties and unsatisfactory work". In the notice, ten specific instances of neglect of duty and two instances of misconduct-acceptance of illegal gratification and fabrication of official record were set out. By his explanation, the respondent submitted that action had already been taken against him by the Superintendent of Police in respect of instances of neglect of duty set out in the notice and no further action in respect thereof could on that account be taken against him, because to do so would amount to imposing double punishment. He denied the charge relating to misconduct and submitted that it was based on the uncorroborated statements of witness who were inimical to him. He also asked for an opportunity to cross-examine those witnesses. The Deputy Inspector General of Police considered the explanation and observed :

(2.) The Deputy Inspector General of Police on December 11, 1954, in discharging the respondent from service, passed a formal order as follows :

(3.) The respondent then presented a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Judicature, Orissa, challenging the validity of the order passed and praying for the issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ quashing the order of discharge. Inter alia, the respondent urged, (1) that the order of discharge was invalid since he was not given a reasonable opportunity to show cause against the action proposed to be taken in regard to him within the meaning of Art. 311 (2) of the Constitution, (2) that the order of discharge was invalid since he was not afforded an opportunity to be heard nor was any evidence taken on the charges framed.