The Patna High Court, while allowing an appeal filed against the termination order passed against teachers on the allegations of their appointments having been made irregularly, held that a departmental proceeding is a quasi-judicial proceeding, the inquiry officer performs a quasi-judicial function and the charges leveled against the delinquent are required to be proved.
Brief Facts:
The writ petitions from which the appeals arise were cases in which the challenge was to the domestic inquiry proceedings initiated against teachers appointed long back, on allegations of their appointments having been made irregularly. The inquiries concluded with termination, some of which orders were once successfully challenged before this Court and again the very same consequence was visited on the teachers who were still in service; after a de novo proceedings as permitted by this Court. Some of the writ petitions were filed against the proceedings initiated, others against the termination orders, and many against the withholding of pension after retirement; which withholding was also 100 percent of the applicable pension.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that a departmental proceeding is a quasi-judicial proceeding, the inquiry officer performs a quasi-judicial function and the charges leveled against the delinquent are required to be proved.
The Court observed that the inquiry officer had a duty to arrive at a finding based on the materials brought on record by the parties. A mere report filed by the investigating officer cannot be treated as evidence in the disciplinary proceeding, especially when, no witness was examined to prove the documents.
The decision of the Court:
The Patna High Court, allowing the appeal, held that the orders of terminations as also the orders of withholding pension are set aside.
Case Title: Rajni Kumari vs The State of Bihar & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice K. Vinod Charan and Hon’ble Justice Harish Kumar
Case no.: Letters Patent Appeal No.406 of 2023
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Sarvesh Kr. Singh
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
