RANJIT KUMAR NAYAK Vs. FCI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to quash the order of dismissal passed by disciplinary authority vide Annexure- 16 and confirmation thereof made by the appellate authority in Annexure-18.

(2.) The short fact of the case, in hand, is that the petitioner was initially working under a Contractor of the F.C.I., where his nick name was recorded as "Akhaya Kumar" in the records. Subsequently, pursuant to an agreement between the F.C.I. Workers Union and the Management of F.C.I., the labourers working under the Contractor were absorbed in the regular services of the F.C.I. Accordingly, the petitioner was taken into service of the F.C.I. as a labourer in the year 1990. At the time of absorbing in F.C.I. service, the petitioner had to fill up a bio-data form in which he has mentioned his nick name as "Akhaya Kumar", but his father's name and permanent address were correctly reflected. Subsequently, in the year 2002, the opposite parties circulated a notification inviting applications from its employees for change of name and address, if any, for the purpose of recording correct information in the office records. Pursuant to such notification, the petitioner submitted his application in March, 2002 with a prayer for change of his name for recording his good name as "Ranjit Kumar Nayak" in place of his nick name as "Akhaya Kumar". The application of the petitioner was duly recommended by the F.C.I. Union and accordingly, the Senior Regional Manager in his order dated 26.07.2002 corrected his name and changed as "Ranjit Kumar Nayak" in place of his nick name "Akhaya Kumar" and advised to record this change of name in all F.C.I. records including C.P.F. Biodata and Service Book etc. After more than three years, an enquiry was conducted by the District Manager, F.C.I., Berhampur who sought for report from the Tahasildar, Dhamnagar to provide information regarding the correctness of the information supplied by the petitioner.

(3.) Mr. S. Mallik, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously urged that once the change of nick name was indicated in the record and approved by the authority in Annexure-4, for the self same reason, the proceeding could not have ben initiated against the person concerned. However, without conducting proper Enquiry punishment was imposed against the petitioner. Mr. Mallik raised various questions including the question of fact that R.I. caused the inquiry, and found that the petitioner's nick name is "Akhaya Kumar" and his good name is "Ranjit Kumar Nayak" and suppressing this fact, the opposite parties have initiated proceeding against him. Accordingly, he seeks for interference of this Court both with the order of the Disciplinary Authority as well as Appellate Authority.