ASHOK KUMAR NONIA Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) In the instant case, prayer has been made for quashing the order dtd. 7/4/2020, whereby the petitioner's prayer for reinstatement with all consequential benefits on the ground of his acquittal in the criminal case being R.C. Case No. 10(A)/2014(D) has been rejected by the respondents by stating that the criminal case registered by the CBI and the departmental enquiry conducted by the respondent-BCCL is entirely different and the judgment of the criminal case is not binding on the domestic enquiry.

(3.) The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. Petitioner was a Bill Clerk in Moonidih Coal Washery of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (for short "M/s. BCCL"). While he was discharging his duties, a written complaint was made to the CBI, Dhanbad on 8/9/2014 by one Niranjan Mahto, a fitter in Moonidih Coal Washery of M/s. BCCL alleging that the petitioner has made a demand of illegal gratification of Rs.500.00 for preparing his arrear bill of Rs.25,000.00. Based on the above complaint, the CBI Dhanbad lodged an FIR being R.C. Case No. 10(A)/2014(D) on 8/9/2014 under Sec. 7 of the P.C. Act, 1988. Thereafter, the CBI Dhanbad constituted a trap team and the petitioner was trapped and arrested on 9/9/2014. After investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted on 7/11/2014 under Sec. 7 and 13(2) read with Sec. 13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act, 1988 and accordingly criminal trial commenced against the petitioner. After submission of charge-sheet in the criminal case, the respondent- BCCL on the departmental side issued a memorandum of charge on 22/4/2015 and the charges contained therein were exactly the same to the charges contained in the charge-sheet of pending criminal case. The departmental proceeding culminated in an order dtd. 20/4/2017 by which the respondent-BCCL imposed a penalty of dismissal of the petitioner from the service of the respondent-BCCL.