LOKANATH MOHANTY Vs. HIGH COURT OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 13.4.1989 and 17.4.1989 (Annexures - 8 & 9) passed by the Disciplinary Authority dismissing the petitioner from service and the order dated 14.3.1995 passed by the Appeal Committee by which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed on 14.3.1995 in Appeal No. 11 of 1989 (Annex. -12) , which was communicated to him by memo. No. 4383(3)/95 dated 3.6.1995 (Annex. -11).

(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner while working as a Process Server in the court of Additional Munsif -cum -Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Umerkote was placed under suspension vide order dated 11.2.1983 pending Departmental Proceeding No.9 of 1983. A charge sheet dated 20.1.1983 (Annex. - 1) was served upon the petitioner on the allegation that the petitioner instead of proceeding to a particular village as per the approved tour programme, accompanied by the Sheristadar and Senior Clerk of the Court went to another village on 3.11.1982 and served fabricated summons on 64 persons and asked them to give illegal gratification in order to dispose of their cases. He had extracted Re.1/ - from each of them on 4.11.1982. The petitioner submitted a reply to the charge sheet. However, the inquiry was conducted in which he was found guilty and was dismissed from service vide order dated 10.1.1986. Being aggrieved the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appeal Committee of this Court which had been allowed vide order dated 11.2.1987 (Annex. -2), the order of punishment was set aside and the matter was remanded to the learned District Judge to decide it afresh, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and full opportunity of defence through a lawyer. Again in pursuance of the said order inquiry was conducted in which the petitioner was represented through a lawyer and the inquiry report dated 7.12.1988 (Annex. -7) was submitted exonerating the petitioner from the charges. But the disciplinary authority, i.e., the learned District Judge disagreeing with the Inquiry Officer passed the order dated 13.4.1989 (Annex. - 8) dismissing the petitioner from service without issuing second show cause to him. The petitioner filed an appeal before the learned Appeal Committee of this Court which was dismissed by order dated 14.3.1995. Hence this writ petition.

(3.) IN Punjab National Bank and Ors., Vs. Kunj Behari Misra, AIR 1998 SC 2713, the Apex Court considered this issue observing as under: