Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
S Pankaj Kumar Sarkar vs Eshita Deb Barma And Others on 11 July, 2022
26
Court
No. 11 11.07.2022 CPAN 1069 of 2021
G.S.Da
s Pankaj Kumar Sarkar
-vs-
Eshita Deb Barma and Others
In
FMA 1232 of 2021
With
CAN 1 of 2021
Pankaj Kumar Sarkar
-VS-
Food Corporation of India
[
Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sarkar
... -in-person
Mr. Kamal Kumar Chattopadhyay
... for the respondent
Party/Parties is/are represented in the order of
their name/names as printed above in the cause title.
Under consideration before this Court is a
second Contempt Application filed by the appellant-in-
person numbered as CPAN 1069 of 2021.
The appellant-in-person contends that
Paragraph 14 of the Affidavit-in-opposition filed by the
Respondents/the Alleged Contemnors/Food
Corporation of India (FCI) is contumacious in as much
as the Respondents/the Alleged Contemnors/Food
Corporation of India (FCI) have absolved themselves
from any responsibility to hold an enquiry under their
extant Regulations. The statements made in
Paragraph 14 by the Respondents/the Alleged
Contemnors/Food Corporation of India (FCI) to the
extent that the Regulations permit the competent
authority of the FCI to dispense with an enquiry in an
appropriate factual scenario, is, according to the
appellant, against the law of the land.
The appellant, in support of his contentions,
relies upon two judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court
reported in (2001) 1 SCC 165 [In Re: Food
Corporation of India, Hyderabad & Ors. -Vs- A.
Prahalada Rao & Anr.] and, a Reportable Judgment
in Civil Appeal Nos. 7201-7202 of 2008 [In Re.:
Food Corporation of India & Ors. -Vs- Sarat
Chandra Goswami].
Per contra, Mr. Chattopadhyay, Learned Counsel
appearing for the FCI, submits that it is within the
competence of the authority to act in terms of its
Regulations. The appellant had approached the
Hon'ble Single Bench seeking reliefs qua the penalty
imposed against him following a Departmental
Enquiry (D.E.) and the Hon'ble Single Bench was
pleased to turn down the prayer of the appellant.
It would be profitable at this juncture to quote
the relevant observations of the Hon'ble Single Bench
while dismissing the writ petition of the appellant in
WP 1688(W) of 2015 with CAN 4839 of 2019, which
read as follows:
"In substance, (a) the writ petitioner seeks
to firstly reopen the entire enquiry and the
final order against him; (b) seek the benefit of
D.P.C. in which he participated pursuant to
leave granted by the Single Bench in W.P.
1312(W)/2006.
In support of his contention as
regards reopening of the final order, the writ
petitioner would rely upon a decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of
Odisha & anr. vs. Mamata Mohanti
delivered on 09.02.2011 in Civil Appeal No.
1272/2011.
The writ petitioner also relies upon a
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Nand Kishore vs. State of Punjab
reported in JT 1995 (7) Supreme Court 69.
The petitioner further relies upon a
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of F.C.I. vs. Sarat Ch. Ghosh dated
21.05.2014 delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Civil Appeal No. 7201-7202/2008.
Let us take the first argument of the
petitioner and the judgments relied upon.
It is clear from the facts narrated
hereinabove that the order of punishment
imposed on the petitioner pursuant to
departmental proceedings has been upheld by
the Division Bench of this Court in its
judgment delivered on 02.04.2008 in A.P.O.
322/2007 (supra).
The question of the departmental
proceedings being reopened either on the
basis of some internal notings in the Vigilance
File of the petitioner or any discovery of new
material, does not and cannot arise."
To the mind of this Court, upon a close reading
of the appellant's contention that the
Respondents/the Alleged Contemnors/Food
Corporation of India (FCI) ought to have acted in
terms of their Regulations pertaining to the D.E. in
which the appellant was the subject of the enquiry,
amounts to an argument on merits in the appeal
itself.
To the further mind of this Court, the validity of
an action taken by the Respondents/the Alleged
Contemnors/Food Corporation of India (FCI) to act or
not to act under its Regulations which is the subject-
matter of the appeal itself and having been decided on
merits by the Hon'ble Single Bench against the
appellant, cannot be allowed to be opened in a
Contempt Application.
For the above reasons, this Court is of the view
that the appeal itself be considered on merits.
Since it is submitted by the parties that the
Paper Book(s) have been prepared and served, FMA
1232 of 2021 be listed under the heading "Hearing
(Gr.-VI) within the first six matters in the
Combined Monthly List of August, 2022.
CPAN 1069 of 2021 stands accordingly
dismissed.
All parties to act on a server copy of this order
duly obtained from the official website of the Hon'ble
High Court, Calcutta.
(Lapita Banerji, J.) (Subrata Talukdar,J.)
