SANGRAM KESHARI MISHRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the order dated 4 5 1998 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack in O. A. No. 596 of 1997 (Annexure 23) by which it has refused to quash the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Government in the General Administration Department memorandum dated 12 12 1996 (Annexure 4), the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition for its quashing.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner, briefly stated, is as follows : He is an Officer belonging to the Indian Administrative Service (RR 85) in the Orissa Cadre. During August, 1990 to July, 1992 he was the Project Officer, District Rural Development Authority ('D. R. D. A.' in short), Koraput. In January, 1992, one P. K. Nayak, I. A. S. just one year senior to him came to be posted as the Collector and District Magistrate, Koraput. In that capacity he was also the ex officio Chairman of the D. R. D. A. There were differences of opinion between them mainly because of petitioner's persistent objections to certain financial irregulaties and illegalities committed by the said Nayak as Chairman, D. R. D. A. Consequently, he tried to harass the petitioner by inducing the subordinate to make annonymous petitions by making false and fabricated allegation against him (petitioner). Shri Nayak even went to the extent of getting a false F. I. R. lodged against the petitioner through one R.C. Pattnaik, Clerk in charge of Stores alleging abduction, wrongful confinement and criminal intimidation. In view of the false and fabricated complaint made at the instance of Shri Nayak the Government directed for internal audit of D.R.D.A., Koraput for the period from August, 1990 to July, 1992 when the petitioner was the Project Officer. The Collector managed to withhold the relevant documents from examination of the audit party on account of which the internal audit report was incomplete and defective. Shri Nayak also pressurised the Government to place the petitioner under suspension and in factGovernment passed order of suspension on 3 12 1992. The petitioner challenged the order of suspension by filing O. A. No.611/ 92 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack which by order dated 9 7 1993 quashed the order of suspension. There was also test audit made by the Accountant General at the instance of Shri Nayak for the period in question. The State Government illegally initiated a departmental proceeding vide memorandum No. 5036/A1S dated 1 3 1993. In a public interest litigation (vide O. J. C. No. 8395 of 1992) this Court by order dated 3 12 1992 directed that the enquiry and audit might continue but before their acceptance, leave must be taken from the Court. As the internal and test audit reports were perfunctory and defective, the Advocate General of the State, on the matter being referred to him, submitted his opinion to the State Government on 20 2 1995 suggesting to hold special audit afresh by the Accountant General, The opinion of the Advocate General was concurred by the Law Department on 22 2 1995. The Chief Secretary of the Government on examination agreed with the aforesaid opinion on 25 2 1995. Pursuant to this, the State Government in the Panchayat Raj department letter dated 24 5 1995 requested the Accountant General, Orissa to conduct a special audit afresh into the accounts of D. R. D. A. for the relevant period. The Panchayat Raj Department simultaneously in its letter dated 23 3 1996 (Annexure 3) wrote to the Finance Department as follows

(3.) TWO questions arise for consideration. (1) Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal is justified in law in refusing to set aside the charge as per the impugned order and (2) Whether the internal and test audit reports can form the basis for framing charge when they are found to be incomplete, defective and prejudicial and more particularly when there is a decision of the Government to hold a special audit whose report has now come out.