ABHISHEK PRABHAKAR Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The reference before the Full Bench has been occasioned as a result of a referring order dated 30.9.2013. Essentially, the issue which arises before the Full Bench can be summarized briefly as follows: Where a Court has prescribed time for the disposal of a disciplinary enquiry and the enquiry is not concluded within the time so fixed, would the consequence in law be to vitiate the enquiry proceedings resulting in rendering the penalty imposed as being without jurisdiction? The following questions have been referred in the order of the learned Single Judge for determination by the Full Bench:-

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Clerk in New India Assurance Company Ltd. on 10.7.1986. He was suspended on 19.3.2008 in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding. As the charge sheet was not served, he moved a representation to the disciplinary authority to revoke the order of suspension under the General Insurance (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1975. In a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court directed, by an order dated 4.11.2008, that the representation of the petitioner be disposed of by a speaking order. On 7.11.2008, a memorandum of charges was served. On 19.2.2009, the representation submitted by the petitioner for the revocation of suspension was rejected. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition in which, by an order dated 30.3.2009, a direction was issued to the disciplinary authority to conclude the enquiry within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The certified copy of the order was received by the employer on 6.4.2009. The enquiry report is dated 17.8.2009 and was remitted to the employee under a covering letter dated 15.10.2009. The enquiry report was actually remitted on 6.11.2009 and was received by the petitioner on 11.11.2009.

(3.) As a matter of first principle, when a mandamus is issued by a Court to complete an act within a stipulated period, the binding direction of the Court has to be complied with. A litigating party cannot ignore or disregard a mandamus of the Court. Hence, when a stipulation as to time is made in an order of the Court directing the conclusion of a disciplinary enquiry, the direction of the Court binds the parties and must be observed.