SURESH KUMAR SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of the Petitioner is that he was working as a Clerk -cum -Typist in the Orissa Nurses & Midwives Examination Board, Bhubaneswar, which was established by the State Government as an autonomous body. The Board is governed by a set of rules called the Orissa Nurses and Midwives Examination Board Rules approved by the State Government. As per Rule 2 of the Rules, the Director of Health Services is the ex -Officio President of the Board. The Petitioner while working as such, as per Order Dated 29.10.1986 passed by the President (Annexure -1) and the Order Dated 30.10.1986 issued by the Board in Annexure - 1/1, he was granted enhanced scale of pay with effect from 1.4.1986. According to the Petitioner, his enhanced pay was approved by the Finance Department as per Annexure -2 series. An anonymous letter addressed to the Principal Secretary to the Government, Department of Health and Family Welfare, copy of which is annexed as Annexure -A to the counter affidavit filed by O.Ps.1 to 3, making certain allegations against the Petitioner, was received, basing upon which an enquiry was made against the Petitioner by the Joint Director of Health Services, (P & D), who submitted his report vide Annexure -8.The Enquiry Officer in his report dated 17.3.2008 has indicated that he presumed it was the work of some miscreants or enemies of the said Officials who were unable to oblige or satisfied them in same Orissa Nursing Council & Board work which may not be ruled out. The Enquiry Officer after recording his findings has also given certain suggestions which include that the Petitioner could not have got the higher scale of pay. The enquiry was started against the Petitioner on the allegation of corruption, which has not been proved but in the enquiry report, an observation has been made that enhancement of the Petitioner's scale of pay in the year 1986 was not proper. Thereafter, the Order Dated 27.3.2008 (Annexure -9) was issued by the Director of Health Services requesting the Secretary, Orissa Nurses & Midwives Examination Board and Council, to stop drawal of the present pay of the Petitioner in the higher scale till final decision is made by the Government/Board.

(2.) MR . B. Mohanty, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Board being the appointing authority of the Petitioner, the Director of Health Services has no jurisdiction to pass the Order Dated 27.3.2008 in Annexure -9. It is also not disputed that the Petitioner is getting the benefit of higher scale of pay since 1986.

(3.) A bare perusal of the order in Annexure -9, which is impugned in this case, indicates that the same is an outcome of the enquiry report and the suggestions made therein. On going through the enquiry report dated 17.3.2008 m Annexure -8, which culminated in issuance of the impugned order in Annexure -9, we do not find anything indicating that there is any misconduct on the part of the Petitioner nor is there anything to show that any proceeding has been initiated with definite charges of misconduct against the Petitioner. In our considered opinion, the order impugned amounts to punishment, which cannot be awarded without following due process of law and without giving the Petitioner an opportunity of hearin.