The Patna High Court, while dismissing a petition filed for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing the finding of the inquiry report whereby the inquiring authority came to the conclusion that the charges were proved against the petitioner, held that the Court shall also not interfere in the findings of the disciplinary proceeding due to the reason that both parties have granted an opportunity to adduce both oral and documentary evidence.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner was appointed Office Assistant in the Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank. When he was posted as Officer Scale-II, he was put under suspension by the Head Office for allegedly committing a fraudulent act while working as a Branch Manager. The petitioner was served with a memorandum of charge in which eight charges were alleged. Following the charge memo, the departmental proceeding was commenced which finally concluded on 17.03.2017; all charges were found proved. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the petitioner preferred to appeal before the Appellate Authority-cum-Chairman which upheld the punishment order. Hence, the present petition.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the said departmental proceeding all charges were found proved as the Enquiry Officer did not appreciate the documentary evidence properly. He argued that in the inquiry proceedings, there was a gross violation of natural justice by the inquiry officer as the petitioner was not granted sufficient time to cross-examine the management witness nor he was provided the relevant document nor granted the opportunity to cross-check the document produced by the management with original.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the departmental inquiry commenced on 04.10.2016 and concluded the same on 20.04.2017 granting every opportunity following the principles of natural justice to defend the petitioner during the inquiry proceeding. He contended that the procedure adopted in the departmental proceeding was proper following the principles of natural justice and granting full opportunity to the petitioner as well as presenting officer both.
Observations of the Court:
The Court observed that in the departmental proceeding that is to say High Court has the power to judicial review being a constitutional Court and the scope of this Court is to merely evaluate the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision itself. It is to be ensured that fairness in the treatment and not to ensure the fairness of conclusion has been made.
The Court noted that a proper opportunity for defense was granted to the petitioner. This Court shall also not interfere in the findings of the disciplinary proceeding due to the reason that both parties have granted opportunity to adduce evidence oral and documentary both.
The decision of the Court:
The Patna High Court, dismissing the petition, held that there is no need for any interference in the orders either in the inquiry report or orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority as well as of the appellate authority.
Case Title: Jai Prakash Singh v The Chairman & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Dr. Anshuman
Case no.: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3982 of 2018
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Ram Binod Singh
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Prabhakar Jha
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
