CHANDAN KUMAR Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED, THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR, DARBHANGA HOUSE, RANCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the departmental proceeding, arising out of the Charge sheet issued vide letter under Ref. No. PO/Karma/Disc.Act/16/399 dated 11.06.2016 under the signature of the Project Officer, Karma. Further prayer has been made for quashing the notice of enquiry under Ref. No. PO/Pindra/Disc.Action/2017/584 dated 28.07.2017 issued by the Senior Manager (Personnel)/ Enquiry Officer, Pindra Colliery, Central Coalfields Limited, whereby and whereunder, Enquiry Officer has been appointed to enquire into the charges framed against the petitioner vide charge sheet dated 11.06.2016.

(2.) The short facts lying in narrow compass is that the petitioner was appointed to the post of General Mazdoor under Category I (T) on 204.2015 under the respondents in terms of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, 2012 of the Coal India Ltd. An FIR, being R.C. case No. 11 (A ) of 2015-R dated 15.12015 was registered for the offence punishable under Section 120 B read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against the petitioner and other employees. It has been alleged in the FIR that on the basis of false and fabricated document submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner had managed to get employment under Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, 2012 of Coal India Ltd.

(3.) It is further the case of the petitioner that after completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the petitioner on 30.06.2016 for the offences punishable under Section 120 B read with Section 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. From the Investigation, it reveals that the petitioner is nephew of Babu Chand Ram and has dishonestly and fraudulently obtained employment on the basis of false genealogical certificate, bearing No. 318 dated 31.12.2013 issued by the Circle Officer, Ramgarh. On the same set of allegation, a departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner in which memo of charge vide Letter No. 1936 dated 22.12.2015 was served upon the petitioner, directing him to submit his explanation within a week from the receipt of Memo of charge. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted his reply on 30.01.2016 before the respondent, explaining his stand in respect of Memo of Charge dated 22.12.2015 and denying the charges levelled against him. On being dissatisfied with the explanation submitted by the petitioner, a disciplinary enquiry was initiated against the petitioner and Enquiry Officer was appointed to conduct enquiry in respect of the charges levelled against the petitioner. It is further the case of the petitioner that upon completion of the enquiry, second show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 4/5.4.2016 by the Disciplinary Authority/ General Manager, Rajrappa Area, wherein it was stated that as to why the penalty should not be imposed against him as the charges levelled against the petitioner have been found proved by the Enquiry Officer. Subsequently, on receipt of the same, the petitioner submitted his detailed explanation on 28.04.2016 before the respondents, denying the charges levelled against the petitioner and to exonerate him from the charges, but surprisingly, the respondents served a new charge sheet to the petitioner vide letter under Ref. No. PO/Karma/Disc.Act/16/399 dated 11.06.2016, to submit an explanation in respect of the charges levelled in the charges sheet dated 11.06.2016 within seven days from the date of receipt of the charge sheet. It is further the case of the petitioner that on perusal of the second charge sheet issued by the respondents, it appears that the charges levelled against the petitioner is based on the allegation alleged against the petitioner in connection with R.C. Case No. 11 (A) of 2015-R dated 15.12.2015 and the charge sheet submitted by the Central Bureau of Investigation. On receipt of the same, the petitioner again submitted his explanation before the respondents on 17.06.2016, apprising him regarding initiation of the departmental proceeding by issuing charge sheet dated 22.12.2015. Thereafter, the Senior Manager (Personnel)/Enquiry Officer issued notice of enquiry vide letter under Ref. No. PO/Pindra/Disc. Action/2017/584 dated 28.07.2017, wherein it was informed that the Senior Manager (Personnel) has been appointed as Enquiry officer to enquire into the charges levelled against the petitioner in connection with the charge sheet dated 11.06.2016. It is the specific case of the petitioner that if departmental proceeding and the criminal case are based on identical and similar set of facts and the charges in the criminal case against a delinquent employee is of grave nature, it would be desirable to stay the departmental proceeding till conclusion of the criminal case. Hence, this writ petition has been preferred.