WAHED ALI Vs. HON'BLE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. B. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U.K. Nair along with Mr. A. Chetri, learned counsel representing the Gauhati High Court.

(2.) THE petitioner, an ex-employee (Record Arranger) of this Court, filed the writ petitions claiming subsistence allowance for the period of suspension (10/12/1993 to 02/04/1996) and to set aside and quash the order dated 02/04/1996 by which he was dismissed from service pursuant to a departmental proceeding. While in WP(C) No. 2145/199, the petitioner has put to challenge the order of dismissal, in WP(C) No. 1622/2000 he has prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay subsistence allowance for the period from 10/12/1993 to 02/04/1996 during which he was placed under suspension pending drawal of the departmental proceeding and also in view of his involvement in the related criminal case.

(3.) MR . U.K. Nair, learned Standing Counsel representing the Gauhati High Court countering the above argument, submits that as the facts well speak for itself, the petitioner was found to be involved in defalcation of huge Govt. money, as a consequence of which he was arrested by the Police and presently criminal proceedings are pending against him. He further submits that departmental proceedings was also initiated against the petitioner in which it was clearly established that he was guilty of the charges levelled against him and considering the gravity of the misconduct, the disciplinary authority thought it prudent to impose the penalty of dismissal from service. He also submits that the petitioner was provided with all reasonable opportunities of being heard and thus the allegation of violation of the principles of natural justice is absurd and untenable.