PARAMANANDA BISWAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - The petitioner's case may be stated in short. He was recruited as a sub-inspector of police in the employment of the Provincial Government of Bihar and Orissa with effect from 2-1-1936 and in support of that case an extract from the gradation list (Annexure-1) has been filed. Column 3 thereof shows that his appointment to police was on 2-1-1936. Orissa was created as a separate Province with effect from 1-4-1936. The petitioner's services were transferred to the newly created Province of Orissa. He served in various capacities and retired from service on 3-3-1968. Prior to his retirement he was on leave for four months preparatory to retirement with effect from 4-11-1967. On 8-2-1968 the Administrative Tribunal issued a set of charges (Annexure-3) to the petitioner alleging certain misconduct relating to the period 25-7-1962 to 5-7-1963 while he was working as Deputy Superintendent of Police at Parlakhemedi in the district of Ganjam. On 23-4-1969 he was served with a letter (Annexure-4) that Opposite Party No. 2 would make enquiry into the charges. The petitioner having retired from services no disciplinary proceedings can be continued against him. Art. 351-A of the Civil Service Regulations (hereinafter to be referred to as the Regulations), as applicable to the State of Orissa, which was brought into force on 4th of 1964 by which the disciplinary proceedings can be continued after retirement has no application to the petitioner as he was in service before 1st April 1936. The petitioner accordingly prayed for issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ for quashing the impugned proceeding against him. Though the essential facts are not in dispute the opposite parties resist the petitioner's case by saying that the petitioner's service would be counted from 2-1-1937 and not from 2-1-1936. Their case is stated as follows. The petitioner was selected as a cadet Sub-Inspector by the Government of Bihar and Orissa in 1935 and was sent for sub-inspector course of training at the Police Training College. Hazaribagh for a period of twelve months from 2-1-1936. During the period of training he held no substantive appointment and was paid only stipend. The period spent under training did not count towards duty according to Rule 682 (d) of the Bihar and Orissa Police Manual, 1930 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Manual). The petitioner was taken as a full-fledged sub-inspector from 2-1-1937 from which date he held a duty post and drew pay in the prescribed scale. His service in the rank of sub-inspector is therefore to be counted from 2-1-1937 and not from 2-1-1936. The rest of the averments both in the petition and counter-affidavit are not material to the point in issue and need not be referred to. The stand of the opposite parties is that Art. 351-A of the Regulations has application to the petitioner and the disciplinary proceeding against him can be continued thereunder as he came into service subsequent to 1-4-1936.

(2.) There is no dispute that the disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner cannot be continued by virtue of the proviso to the Explanation to Art. 351-A of the Regulations if the petitioner entered into service before the 1st day of April, 1936. The only question for determination, therefore, is whether the petitioner's service would be counted with effect from 2-1-1936 or 2-1-1937.

(3.) Art. 351-A in the Regulations was substituted by Notification No. 15044-Pen, -32/64F. dated 4th May 1964. It runs thus: "NOTIFICATION The 4th May, 1964.