RAMENDRA KISHORE BISWAS Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE granted.

(2.) THE appellant was proceeded against dep.mentally when the Enquiry Officer found him guilty of the charges framed against him and submitted his report dated 17.11.1992 to the disciplinary authority. After issuance of show -cause notice. to the appellant seeking his reply, the disciplinary authority agreed with the Enquiry Officer and dismissed the appellant from service vide memo dated 12.2.1993. The order of dismissal was put in issue by the appellant by instituting a civil suit for declaration that the order of dismissal from service was void and illegal and that the appellant was entitled to be reinstated. On 21.8.1995, the suit was dismissed. The appeal filed by the appellant before the learned District Judge, however, succeeded and on 30.7.1996, the learned District Judge allowing the appeal declared that since proper procedure had not been followed and the appellant had been denied the facility of a Defence Assistant after his earlier Defence Assistant had ceased to act for him, the order of dismissal was illegal. The appellate Court, however, granted liberty to the respondent to continue with the departmental enquiry after providing the appellant with a Defence Assistant of his choice from the stage at which his earlier Defence Assistant had ceased to act as Defence Assistant and to proceed therefrom. The respondent filed an appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge while the appellant filed cross -objections. On 21.3.1997, the second appeal filed by the respondent was allowed. The learned Single Judge of the High Court referred to Rule 24 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and opined that in view of those provisions, the jurisdiction of the civil Court had been taken away. The learned Single Judge went on to hold that where recourse is had to departmental proceedings, the order of the appellate authority against an adverse order of the disciplinary authority, could only be the subject -matter of challenge in a writ petition and that the jurisdiction of the civil Court to deal with a matter of this type through a civil suit stood ousted.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. P.K. Goswami, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the appellant and Ms Sumeet Kaur, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents.