PARTHA CHONGDAR Vs. KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A departmental proceeding was initiated against the appellant, an employee of the corporation, by the concerned disciplinary authority of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. Initially one Sri Chaitanya De Sarkar was appointed as Inquiry Officer but as he submitted resignation from his engagement, one Sri Biswajit Majumder, Director General (Bustee Cell and S.S.E.P) was appointed as the Inquiry Officer. The Inquiry Officer submitted his enquiry report to the Disciplinary Authority but the said authority came to the conclusion that the Inquiry Officer had not specifically dealt with each article of charge and did not express his definite findings on each article of charge/imputations. Accordingly, the Disciplinary Authority vide order dtd. 4/9/2003 under Memo No. P/12(21)/VI/115/23 set aside the enquiry report dtd. 10/2/2023 and appointed a new Inquiry Officer to inquire de novo into the charges framed against the delinquent officer, that is, the petitioner/appellant before this Court.

(2.) The petitioner/appellant challenged the order dtd. 4/9/2023 of the Disciplinary Authority by filing a writ petition being no. WPO 1597 of 2023 and the learned Single Judge passed an interim order on 25/9/2023 stating that the Inquiry Officer may conduct the enquiry but no effect to the enquiry report shall be given without taking leave of the Court. As the appellant is dissatisfied with and aggrieved by such interim order, the instant appeal has been preferred.

(3.) According to the learned counsel of the appellant Mr. Soumya Majumdar the Disciplinary Authority has no jurisdiction/competence under the relevant law, rules and regulations to order fresh de novo inquiry. Learned counsel pointed out that Regulations 9, 10, 11 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Officers' and Employees' (Conduct) Regulation, 1991 have laid down the elaborate process for proceeding after completion of the enquiry. The said regulations do not empower the Disciplinary Authority to order fresh enquiry. Moreover, when an act is required to be done in a certain manner then such act must be done in that manner only and not in any other mode or manner. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this court to the decisions Nazir Ahmad Vs. The King Emperor reported at (1935-36) 63 Indian Appeals 372 and also Hukam Chand Shyam Lal Vs. Union of India and Others (1976) 2 SCC 128.