B T LAKSHMAN S/O LATE THIMMAIAH Vs. MYSORE MINERALS LIMITED; MANAGING DIRECTOR, MYSORE MINERALS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this Writ Petition is to quash Articles of Charges dated 16/04/2008, 02/06/2008 and 31/07/2008 as per Annexures-A, C and E. The framing of charges against the petitioner is challenged on the ground that the Mysore Minerals Limited Officers/Employees Conditions of Service (Conduct and Disciplinary proceedings) Rules 1991, does not permit and enable the respondent to initiate enquiry after the retirement of an employee.

(2.) The petitioner was serving in the office of the respondent on various responsibilities and he is retired from service on superannuation on 30/06/2007. The Rules referred above are in respect of the respondent to initiate enquiry only against its employees and since the petitioner is no more an employee of the respondent since he retired in the year 2007, initiation of the enquiry is bad in law and without authority of law.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents files statement of objections and additional statement of objections and submit to dismiss this petition. He submits that memos were issued, when petitioner was in service and petitioner taken time to file the reply. In the meanwhile, he retired from service and the charges leveled are very grave in nature. Accordingly, charge sheet is issued hence, the respondent is entitled to initiate enquiry for which he referred Rule 29 of the Disciplinary Rules of the respondent. The learned counsel referred the Judgments in U P STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD V. KAMAL SWAROOP TONDON, 2008 AIR(SCW) 1241 and 2013 AIR(SCW) 2573. The charge it is submitted, it relates to 1997, 2004 and 2005 and the gravity of charges is self-explanatory where it is alleged that petitioner has caused huge loss to the company.