MANJU KUMAR MAJHI Vs. REGISTRAR ORISSA HIGH COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who was Junior Clerk posted in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-S.D.J.M., Deogargh in the Judgeship of Sambalpur has filed the instant Writ Petition for setting aside the Order dated August 18, 2005 passed by the appeal Committee modifying the punishment of dismissal from service imposed by the Learned District Judge, Sambalpur in the disciplinary proceeding initiated against him to that of compulsory retirement and direct the Opposite Parties to reinstate him in service with all consequential/service benefits and to pay all back wages. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on April 10, 1989 as a Junior Clerk pursuant to a recruitment drive by the District Judge, Sambalpur. He was placed under suspension vide Order dated May 18, 1998 pursuant to a Departmental Proceedings initiated against him for misconduct. Thereafter he was served with the charge memo on November 23, 1998. The Departmental Proceedings was registered as D.P. No. 2/1998. Side by side Criminal Proceedings were also registered against him as G.R. Case No. 33/1998 for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 468, IPC on the allegation that during the year 1997 he was working as Junior Clerk in the Office of S.D.J.M., Deogarh. Previously he was working at Padampur and was attached to the Establishment of S.D.J.M. and during his tenure at Padampur he remained absent unauthorizedly for a period of about 75 days. Thereafter, when he was posted at Deogarh, he produced a fake letter bearing No.7 dated January 6, 1997 said to have been issued by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Padampur regarding regularization of his leave for the period of his unauthorized absence at Padampur before the Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh. He managed to withdraw a sum of Rs. 4,454/- through Treasury Bill No. 40/96-97. Again he brought and produced another letter before the Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh vide letter bearing No. 46 dated February 10, 1997 purported to have been issued from the S.D.J.M., Padampur regarding regularization of his leave for the period of his unauthorized absence. But as there were some discrepancies in the said letters, the amount of Rs. 4,015 could not be drawn and correspondence was made with the S.D.J.M., Padampur and it was ascertained that the above two letters produced by the Petitioner were fake and the entire period of his unauthorized absence at Padampur has not been regularized. However, in the Criminal proceedings, the petitioner, was acquitted of the charges on the ground that Acquittance Roll maintained in the Accounts Section of Civil Courts, Deogarh was not seized. Had it been seized and produced in the Court, it would have brought to light whether any amount was disbursed to him or not and those two letters were also not produced in the Court, which were allegedly forged by the petitioner. The register showing receipt of the letters was also not produced by the prosecution.

(2.) However Departmental proceedings were continued. In the charge memo the following charges were levelled vide Order dated November 23, 1998 against the petitioner. Thereafter, a supplementary charge-sheet was issued contents of which are as follows: Disciplinary Proceeding No. 2/1998 Name, rank and grade of Officer Proceeded against Sri Manju Kumar Majhi Junior Clerk, Office of Civil Judge Junior Division-cum-S. D.J.M., Deogarh. CHARGE S1. No. Particulars of Charges. 1. That during your present incumbency as Junior Clerk in the Office of the S.D.J.M., Deogarh, you produced a letter bearing No. 7 dated January 6, 1997 purported to have been issued under the signature of S.D.J.M., Padampur, before the Civil Judge (Senior division-Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh regarding non-drawal of your pay on the basis of which the Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh draw you pay for the period from December 1, 1992 to December 21, 1992, February 4, 1993 to February 15, 1993, April 15, 1993 to April 26, 1993, February 12, 1993 to May 14, 1993, June 6, 1993 to June 10, 1993, September 6, 1993 to September 21, 1993 amounting to Rs. 4,545/- and disbursed the same to you. Subsequently, it come to light that the aforesaid letter No: 7 dated January 6, 1997 was a forged and fabricated one. That, You had also produced a letter bearing No. 46 dated February 10, 1997 from your custody, regarding non-drawal of your pay purported to have been issued under the signature of S.D.J.M., Padampur before the Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-cum Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh who basing on the said letter, was going to draw your pay for the period from December 22, 1992 to December 31, 1992, November 3, 1993 to November 22, 1993, December 1, 1993 to December 15, 1993, March 8, 1994 to March 22, 1994 amounting to gross of Rs. 4,015/-, deduction of Rs. 600/- Net amount of Rs. 3415/-, but at the time of signing the bill, he i.e. the Civil Judge (Sr. Division- Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh entertained serious doubt on the genuineness of the letter No. 46 dated February 10, 1997 consequent upon which he stopped his further action in that connection and on his quarry he could know subsequently that the letter in question was a forged and manufactured one. That, in order to ascertain about the genuineness of the letter No. 7 dated January 6, 1997 and 46 dated February 10, 1997, which were produced by you from your own custody, the Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh wrote two letters, one of which addressed to the S.D.J.M., Padampur vide letter No. 84 dated February 17, 1997 and the copy of the said letter was communicated to the Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Padampur Accounts, Deogarh though specifically directed his office for dispatching those two letters of quarry. You under influence or otherwise, received the same as a bearer. That subsequently it has come to light that you suppressed the letters bearing No. 84 dated February 17, 1997 addressed to the S.D.J.M., Padampur and Memo No. 85 dated February 17, 1997 communicating the copy of the above letter, to Civil Judge (Senior Division)-cum-Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Padampur, issued by the Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh and did not deliver those letters to the addresses. That, after about of lapse of four and half months you produced from your custody before the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Deogarh two letters bearing No. 295 dated July 2, 1997 and 305 dated June 30, 1997 purported to have been issued by Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Padampur and S.D.J.M., Padampur under their signature showing them to be the reply to the query made by Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh. The aforesaid two letters (reply to query) were subsequently found to be forged one. Your above commissions and omissions exhibit your indulgence in unlawful, immoral and unfair activities amounting to forgery, fraud, mischief and cheating which constitute act of gross-misconduct and thus unbecoming of Government servant. You are hereby directed to submit your written statement of defence before February 23, 1998 failing which the matter shall be decided ex parte. You are further directed to state specifically whether you intend to be heard in person. , Sd/U.S. Mishra, District Judge, Sambalpur. November 23, 1998 Disciplinary Proceeding No. 2/1998 Name, rank and grade of Officer proceeded against Sri Manju Kumar Majhi, Junior Clerk of the Office of the Civil Judge (Jr.Divn)cum- S.D.J.M., Deogarh (under suspension). Additional Charge S1. No. Particulars of Charge 1. That during your present incumbency as Junior Clerk in the Office of the Civil Judge (Jr. Division)-S.D.J.M., Deogarh, you produced from your custody a letter bearing No. 7 dated January 6, 1997 purported to have been issued under the signature of S.D.J.M., Padampur before the Civil Judge (Sr. Division)- Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh regarding non-drawal of your pay on the basis of which the Judge-in-Charge, Accounts, Deogarh drew your pay for the period from December 1, 1992 to December 21, 1992, February 4, 1993 to February 15, 1993, April 15, 1993 to April 26, 1993, May 12, 1993 to May 14, 1993, June 6, 1993 and to June 10, 1993 and September 6, 1993 to September 21, 1993 amounting to Rs. 4,545/- and disbursed the same to you, subsequently it came to light that the aforesaid letter No. 7 dated January 6, 1997 was a forged and fabricated one, similarly you had also produced a letter bearing No. 46 dated February 10, 1997 from your custody, regarding non-drawal of your pay purported to have been issued under the signature of S.D.J.M. Padampur before the Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-J.I.C., Accounts, Deogarh who basing on the said letter, was going to draw your pay for the period from December 22, 1992 to December 31, 1993, November 3, 1993 to November 22, 1993, December 1, 1993 to December 15, 1993 and March 8, 1994 to March 22, 1994 amounting to gross of Rs. 4,015/- deduction of Rs. 600/-, net amount of Rs. 3,415/- but at the time of signing the bill, he i.e. the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), J.I.C., Accounts, Deogarh entertained serious doubt on the genuineness of the letter No. 46 dated February 10, 1997 consequent upon which he stopped his further action in that connection and on his query he could know subsequently that the letter in question was forged and manufactured and that you took away the said forged letter No. 7 dated January 6, 1997 which was posted in the acquaintance roll, so also letter No. 46 dated February 10, 1997 kept in the file as reported by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Deogarh vide his office letter No. 436 dated February 22, 1997 (copy enclosed). Your above conduct shows your mala fide intention to screen and or destroy the evidence against your such unlawful activities which amount to gross misconduct and thus unbecoming of a Government servant. You are hereby directed to submit your written statement of defence by June 24, 2000, failing which the matter shall be decided ex-parte. You are further directed to state specifically whether you intend to be heard in person. Sd/- S.C. Mishra, District Judge, Sambalpur.

(3.) When the charge-sheet was sent by Registered Post to the petitioner, the same was not received by him, as he was absent and ultimately the District Judge ordered for publication of the charges in the News Paper and the same was published. The Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Enquiry Officer thereafter served the charge memo upon the petitioner. However, the reply to the charge memo was submitted by the petitioner to the District Judge on August 7, 1999 which was forwarded by the S.D.J.M., Deogarh to the District Judge, in which it was mentioned that there was every possibility of prejudice against the petitioner due to pendency of Criminal Case. However, thereafter vide application dated November 3, 2002 the petitioner demanded copies of the letter No. 7 dated January 6, 1997 and letter No. 46 dated February 10, 1997. Since through supplementary charge-sheet it was already mentioned that he had taken away those letters, there was no question of supply of the copies of those letters. However, it was the fact that the petitioner received the amount towards salary for the period of his unauthorized absence, which was not sanctioned. He appeared in the proceeding but did not file written statement of his defence. He also remained absent on November 6, 1999 when the proceeding was posted for hearing. So the proceeding was heard ex-parte. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report on November 10, 1999. Thereafter, the District Judge, Sambalpur passed the punishment order dismissing the petitioner from service vide letter dated April 26, 2004. Then the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appeal Committee. In the appeal the punishment was reduced to that of compulsory retirement instead of dismissal from service.