COAL INDIA LTD Vs. N K JOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendants' appeal and has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 6.5.1991 passed by the court of Shri M.S. Lobana, Additional District Judge, Chandigarh who allowed the appeal of plaintiff-respondent Shri N.K. Joshi by reversing the judgment and decree of the trial court and granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff-respondent against the defendant-appellants to the effect that the order of the defendant No. 2 dated 7/17-12-1984 was without jurisdiction, inoperative and defendants were also restrained from causing any enquiry against the plaintiff in pursuance of the said order. It was also observed by way of clarification by the Ist Appellate Court that it would be open to the Disciplinary Authority to take appropriate action on the report submitted to it by the Enquiry Authority Shri S.S. Salodkar in accordance with the provisions of the Rules.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that N.K. Joshi, Senior Sales Officer of Coal India Ltd. filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the order of the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Coal India Ltd, defendant No. 2 issued vide No. CIL/X.1(E) 05292/92/1908 dated 7/17.12.84 and served upon the plaintiff through defendant No. 3 at Chandigarh vide No. CIL/CMO/Chd/COFD/ENRY/PA/46 dated 22.1.1995 was unconstitutional, unlawful arbitrary, unwarranted, without jurisdiction, mala fide, motivated and inductive with colourful exercise of powers in violation of the service bye- laws and instructions governing the service condition of the plaintiff and was contrary to Rules of natural justice and fair play and these were null and viod, ineffective and inoperative for all intents and purposes and the plaintiff was exonerated from the charges levelled against him vide charge sheet No. CIL/X/E/05291/26/885 dated 31.5.1982 by defendant No. 1 company. The plaintiff also prayed that defendants be restrained from holding fresh enquiry as ordered vide impugned order dated 7/17-12-84 quoted above. The case set up by Mr. Joshi was that he was originally appointed as Junior Sales Officer and was promoted as Sales Officer and then to Senior Sales Officer and at that relevant time he was working as Regional Sales Officer at Chandigarh. The plaintiff was elected Vice President of Coal Mines Officers Association of India and he started participating in all lawful activities of the Association. In order to stop the plaintiff from participation in these activities defendant No. 2 started victimising the plaintiff and started transferring him from one place to the other. Defendant No. 2 served upon the plaintiff a charge sheet dated 31.5.1982. The plaintiff submitted an application on 7.8.1982 for the inspection of the documents and submitted interim reply to the charge-sheet vide registered letter dated 20.9.1982. Defendant No. 2 appointed Shri S.S. Salodkar, an Enquiry Officer and Shri B.N. Sinha as the Presenting Officer. The said Enquiry Officer held a detailed enquiry and recorded evidence of both the sides. He concluded the enquiry and submitted his report to defendant No. 2. The plaintiff alleges that he understands and believes that Mr. S.S. Salodkar exonerated him of the charges as not proved. The services of the plaintiff are governed by Coal India (Executive, Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1978. It was further pleaded by the plaintiff that in accordance with the provisions of said service Rules, no order of fresh enquiry could be passed in respect of the charges which had already been enquired into a competent officer and about which the report has already been submitted. However, defendant No. 2 quashed the report of Mr. S.S. Salodkhar and ordered for a fresh enquiry and applied Shri A.V. Brahma as enquiry officer. The plaintiff states that this order of defendant No. 2 was without jurisdiction and he had no right or authority to quash the enquiry report submitted by Mr. S.S. Salodkar and to order for fresh enquiry.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendants who took preliminary objections i.e. that the suit was not maintainable in the present form; that the suit was bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties; that the suit was not maintainable in the present form; that bad by the principles of waiver or acquiscence. On merits, the stand of the defendants was that the plaintiff was appointed as Junior Sales Officer and was promoted as Sales Officer and then to Senior Sales Officer. The work of the plaintiff was not satisfactory. The defendants denied that defendant No. 2 started victimising the plaintiff by ordering frequent transfers from one place or the other in order to deprive the plaintiff from participating in the activities of the union. The defendants admit that the charge sheet was issued upon the plaintiff according to rules. There was no vindictive attitude on the part of defendant No. 2 when he issued charge-sheet. The first Enquiry Officer Mr. S.S. Salodkar failed to conduct the enquiry in a proper manner. The defendants admit that vide order dated 7/17.12.1984 the report of the first Enquiry Officer Mr. S.S. Salodhar was quashed and it was in the competency of defendant No. 2 to do so. He had also powers to hold fresh enquiry according to rules. Lastly it was submitted by the defendants that the suit of the plaintiff had no merit and the same may be dismissed. The plaintiff filed rejoinder to the written statement of defendants in which he reiterated his allegations made in the plaintiff while denying those in the written statement and from the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues :-