ANJAN BORA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. U.K. Nair, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. B. Chetry, learned counsel representing all the respondents.

(2.) Although the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the Show Cause Notice dated 03.07.2006 whereby allegations were made against him, there are other aspects of this case inviting the Court's attention. The said Show Cause Notice dated 03.07.2006 and the reply made by the petitioner formed the basis of initiation of disciplinary proceedings against him. The procedure as prescribed under Rule 9 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964 was followed upto the stage of sub-rule (7) thereof, in that, upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence etc. the Enquiry Officer submitted a Report in the year, 2010. Incidentally, enquiry commenced from the year 2009. According to the petitioner, neither a copy of the Enquiry Report was furnished to him nor the result of the enquiry was brought to its logical conclusion. For the inordinate delay caused and for the fact that the petitioner was made to lead a life under a state of uncertainty, this instant petition was instituted. In the course of this proceeding, several orders were passed by this Court, requiring the respondent authorities to inform the Court as to the fate of the disciplinary proceedings. The respondent authorities had also filed affidavit-in-opposition on 6.01.2016 ensuring that the disciplinary proceedings will be concluded in three month's time. A new twist to the case was brought about when a letter dated 22.04.2016 was produced by Mr. B. Chetry, learned Senior Counsel, State of Assam. This Letter /Order dated 22.04.2016 forms part of the record in IA(C) 66/2016.

(3.) As evident from the Order dated 22.04.2016, the Enquiry Officer had submitted the Report and while the matter was processed in the Department, the file got misplaced and records pertaining to the disciplinary proceedings remained untraced. Meantime, the petitioner was reinstated in service. The said Order dated 22.04.2016 makes mention that the charges levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature and the petitioner cannot be exonerated simply because the records have been misplaced. A decision was taken to order a de novo enquiry into the matter and by observing that the same will be concluded within a period of 7(seven) months. Most importantly, the earlier proceedings against the petitioner were ordered to be treated as closed.