VINCENT Vs. KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board is a statutory corporation established under the provisions of the Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board Act,1957(hereinafter called the Act ).It is the duty of the Board to organise,develop and regulate Khadi and Village Industries and perform such functions as the Government may pres­cribe from time to time.It is its duty to prepare and forward to the Government the programme of work in each year on or before such date as may be fixed by the Govern­ment.The Government may approve and sanction the programme as a whole or with such modification as they deem fit.The Board shall have its own fund and all receipts of the Board shall be credited thereto and all payments by the Board shall be met therefrom.All property,fund and other assets of the Board is to be held and applied by it subject to the provisions of and for the purposes of the Act.In the discharge of its functions under the Act the Board is to be bound by such directions as may be given to it by the Government.Members of the Board and members of the staff of the Board are to be deemed,when acting or pur­porting to act in pursuance of any of the provisions of the Act,to be public servants within the meaning of section 21 of the Indian Penal Code.Rule making power is conferred on the Government by section 33 to make rules for the pur­pose of carrying out the objects of the Act.Accordingly the Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board Rules,1960 have been framed.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk in the office of the Khadi and Village Industries Board,Trivandrum(hereinafter called the Board ).In 1964 he was posted as Lower Division Accountant in the office of the Village Industries Officer,Quilon.According to the Office Order issued,with effect from 6th October 1964,in the Quilon Village Industries Office,the Lower Division Accountant in the office was directed to attend all matters relating to cash and accounts in addition to some other items of work specified in the order.The petitioner was hence attending to such work.But this order was superseded by Ext.P -2 order passed by one Shri Abdul Samad when he assumed charge as Industries Officer,Quilon.According to the petitioner thereafter he had no responsibility for the cash.It is said that Ext.P -2 order was again superseded by Ext.P -3 order.This order provided that the Lower Division Accountant was to deal only with papers relating to accounts and other financial matters so much so,according to the petitioner,even thereafter he had no responsibility for the cash.

(3.) AS I said earlier,according to the petitioner he was not responsible for the custody of the cash and therefore the charges against him ought not to have been found.I do not think it is the province of this court to go into this matter.But there is another plea taken which deserves notice of this court.It is said that the Board acted merely upon the report by the second respondent,which report ought not to have been called for,in view of the fact that the second respondent was highly biased against the petitioner.As I said earlier the circumstance that he was figuring as the real prosecutor in the criminal proceedings taken against the petitioner and the Peon are pointed out as relevant and as disqualifying the second respondent from acting as the enquiry officer.It is said that in the earlier proceedings he functioned as the real prosecutor and he has taken the role of a judge in the subsequent enquiry.It is said that there­fore the punishment should be found to be bad for the reason that it is in violation of all civilized canons of natural jus­tice and for that reason the orders Exts.P -6 and P -7 are challenged;