"I express my anguish and displeasure over the manner in which the disciplinary proceeding has been held in the present case and the appellate order has been passed. 67. In numerous cases, this Court has experienced that more often than not, the authorities/functionaries, under the Rules, fail to adhere to the statutory provisions. Breach of statutory prescriptions in disciplinary proceedings, involving matters of serious misconduct by Government Servants, renders the disciplinary action unsustainable, which is not in public interest. I have dealt with various provisions under the Rules, in the present judgment, with an expectation, that top officials, under the State Government, shall take all possible corrective measures including by way of imparting training to the officials who play their respective roles under the Rules. For the said purpose, let a copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary, Bihar, for him to chalk out ways and means to ensure strict compliance of various provisions under the Rules, in the light of the observations made in the present judgment."
-Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh in Abhay Kumar vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. (2020), February 24, 2020
In The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Department, Government of Bihar & Ors. vs. Abhay Kumar (2025), Patna High Court's Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma delivered a 4-page long judgement dated October 30, 2025, wherein, it concluded:"4. From the perusal of records of the case it is apparent that the order of the learned Single Judge does not take away any right of the concerned parties, and the matter has already been remanded to the competent authority for taking a fresh decision in accordance with the law. 5. In addition to this, the department has already made compliance of the order awaiting the outcome of this appeal. We also could not find any impropriety in the said direction of learned Single Judge. Further, we find that there is no sufficient material available on record to substantiate the grounds of the present appeal. Therefore, the appeal is devoid of merit and not fit for interference. 6. The present Letters Patent Appeal is accordingly dismissed."
The other four respondents were: Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger, Collector, Lakhisarai, Senior Deputy Collector, Lakhisarai and Circle Officer, Suryagarha Block, Lakhisarai.
The Letters Patent Appeal was directed against 53-page long judgment dated February 24, 2020 passed in Abhay Kumar vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. (2020), by Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh whereby and where under the Single Judge had been pleased to allow the writ application and set aside the impugned order dated April 20, 2015 passed by the disciplinary authority and order dated November 16, 2016 passed by the appellate authority being unsustainable in the law. The Court directed the disciplinary authority to consider afresh, the report of inquiry officer and the materials available on record of the departmental enquiry and take a fresh decision in accordance with law, observing that it will open for him to exercise his power under Sub Rule 1 of Rule 18 of the Rules by remitting the case back to Inquiring Authority for further enquiry consequent upon quashing of the impugned order of dismissal and the appellate order and further the petitioner shall be required to be reinstated forthwith because of the manner in which the departmental enquiry has been concluded and the punishment has been imposed. The Court also directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to full back wages for the period during which he remained out of service because of illegal order of punishment.
Justice Singh, the Single Judge had observed: “64. I direct the disciplinary authority, in the facts and circumstances of the case, to consider afresh, the report of the inquiry officer and the materials available on record of the departmental enquiry, and take afresh decision in accordance with law. It will be open for him to exercise his power under sub Rule (1) of Rule 18 of the Rules by remitting the case back to the Inquiring Authority for further enquiry. Consequent upon quashing of the impugned order of dismissal and the appellate order, the petitioner shall be required to be reinstated forthwith. Because of the manner in which the departmental enquiry has been conducted and the punishment has been imposed, I direct that the petitioner shall be entitled to full back wages for the period during which he remained out of service because of illegal order of punishment. 65. This writ application is allowed accordingly in terms of the directions and observations as made hereinabove.”
Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh had relied on the decision in Union of India vs. Prakash Kumar Tandon (AIR 2009 SC 1375), wherein, the Supreme Court, dealing with the role of the Inquiry Officer held as under:-
“15. The principles of natural justice demand that an application for summoning a witness by the delinquent officer should be enquiry officer. It was obligatory on the part of the enquiry officer to pass an order in the said application. He could not refuse to consider the same. It is not for the Railway Administration to contend that it is for them to consider as to whether any witness should be examined by it or not. It was for the enquiry officer to take a decision thereupon. A disciplinary proceeding must be fairly conducted. An enquiry officer is a quasi-judicial authority. He, therefore, must perform his functions fairly and reasonably which is even otherwise the requirement of the principles of natural justice.”
He underlined the significance of recording of reasons which has been noted in a series of decisions; illustratively in G. Vallikumari vs. Andhra Education Society, reported in (2010) 2 SCC 497, Oryx Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (2010) 13 SCC 427 and Kranti Associates (P) Ltd. & Anr. vs. Masood Ahmed Khan & Ors. reported in (2010) 9 SCC 496.
In his first order as Acting Chief Justice Justice Sudhir Singh upheld the judgement by Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal filed by Principal Secretary, Rural Department, Government of Bihar.
No comments:
Post a Comment