Gauhati High Court
Sarat Chandra Buragohain vs Oil And Natural Gas Corporation ... on 16 November, 2023
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010033282022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1417/2022
SARAT CHANDRA BURAGOHAIN
S/O LATE TANKESWAR BURAGOHAIN, R/O VILL-SENCHOWA, P.O.-
BHATIAPAR, P.S.-SIVASAGAR, DIST-SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, PIN-785664
VERSUS
OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD AND 2 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, ERBG, NAZIRA, DIST-
SIVASAGAR, PIN-785685, ASSAM
2:THE DIRECTOR
HUMAN RESOURCES
O.N.G.C. (L)
TEL BHAWAN
GREEN HILLS BUILDING
DEHRADUN
UTTARAKHAND
PIN-248001
3:IN-CHARGE (S.E.E.)
O.N.G.C. (L)
SEPARATED EMPLOYEE CELL
GROUND FLOOR
GREEN HILLS BUILDING
DEHRADUN
UTTARAKHAND
PIN-24800
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P BHARDWAJ
Advocate for the Respondent : MD A A HUSSAIN (r- 1,2,3)
Page No.# 2/6
Linked Case : WP(C)/1595/2020
SARAT CHANDRA BURAGOHAIN
S/O- LT. TANKESWAR BURAGOHAIN
EX. A.A. GRADE-II (M.M)
R/O- VILL- SENCHOWA VILLAGE
P.O. BHATIAPAR
P.S. SIVSAGAR
DIST.- SIVSAGAR
ASSAM
C.P.F. NO.- 32877
VERSUS
OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.
(REP. BY REGIONAL DIRECTOR ONGC) ERBG
NAZIRA
DIST.- SIVASAGAR
ASSAM
PIN- 781006
2:IN-CHARGE
OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.
(S.E.E) O.N.G.C (L)
SEPARATED EMPLOYEE CELL
GROUP FLOOR
GREEN HILLS
DEHRADUN
UTTARAKHAND
------------
Advocate for : MR. R P HAZARIKA
Advocate for : MD A A HUSSAIN (R-1
2) appearing for OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 16-11-2023
1. Heard Mr. P Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner in both the
writ petitions. Also heard Mr. AA Hussain, learned counsel for the
Page No.# 3/6
respondents/ONGC Ltd.
2. The two writ petitions are being disposed of by a common order, inasmuch
as, the petitioner in WP(C) No. 1595/2020 has prayed for release of gratuity
from the date of his joining in service, i.e., 28.02.1973 to the post of Assistant
Grade-II in the ONGC, till the date of his dismissal from service on 19.05.1999.
In WP(C) No. 1417/2022, the petitioner has prayed for release of all retirement
benefits, which the petitioner is entitled to, without specifying which retirement
benefits he is entitled to.
3. The petitioner's case is that he was appointed as an Assistant Grade-II
officer in the ONGC Ltd. On 28.02.1973 and was dismissed from service on
19.05.1999, as the petitioner was convicted in a criminal proceeding on
corruption charges, for having misappropriated an amount of Rs.2,20,000/-. The
petitioner was convicted by the learned Special Judge, (Prevention Corruption
Act), Guwahati in Special Case 1(C)/1988 vide judgment dated 24.09.1996 and
his appeal in this Court, vide Criminal Appeal No. 266/1996, was dismissed on
28.04.2006.
4. The petitioner had also put to challenge the impugned order dated
19.05.1999, by which he had been dismissed from service, in WP(C) No.
1965/2007. However, WP(C) No. 1965/2007 was dismissed vide order dated
05.09.2014.
Page No.# 4/6
5. The petitioner claimed payment of his Contributory Provident Fund (CPF)
amount on being released from prison, the petitioner was paid his CPF on
21.09.2010.
6. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner is not aware of the
service benefits that would have to be paid to him by the ONGC and it is the
duty of the ONGC to clarify as to what should be paid to the petitioner.
7. Mr. AA Hussain, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand
submits that the writ petition having been filed twenty two (22) years after his
dismissal from service, the same is hit by delay and laches. He also submits that
as a consequence of the petitioner being dismissed from service, which is a
major penalty, the petitioner is not entitled to payment of gratuity, as gratuity is
forfeited on dismissal from service. Further, encashment of half pay leave (good
health reward) is not admissible under Rule 22(2) of Leave Rule, 1995. Earned
leave encashment is also not payable in case of removal or dismissal from
service. He also submits that the petitioner is not entitled to any post retirement
medical benefits or travelling allowance as he has been dismissed from service.
He accordingly submits that the writ petitions should be dismissed.
8. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
9. As can be seen from the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Leave Rules,
Page No.# 5/6
1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Leave Rules, 1995), the petitioner is not
entitled to encashment of half pay leave or earned leave encashment, as he has
been dismissed from service. Further, in terms of Section 4(6) of the Payment of
Gratuity Act, 1972, the gratuity payable to an employee may be wholly or
partially forfeited, if the services of such employee has been terminated for any
act which constitutes an offence involving moral turpitude. In the present case,
the petitioner has been convicted for misappropriation by the learned Special
Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) in respect of charges under Sections 120-
B/468/471/420 IPC and under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the same was upheld by this Court.
10. On considering the above, the petitioner is not entitled to any payment of
gratuity, as he has been convicted for an offence involving moral turpitude.
Further, he is not entitled to any other allowance besides CPF, which he has
been given.
11. With respect to the issue of whether the petitioner has been given
subsistence allowance during his suspension period, keeping in view the fact
that he has misappropriated Rs. 2,20,000/-, besides the judgment of the
Division Bench of this Court passed in Harendra Chandra Nath vs. State of
Tripura, reported in 2013 2 GLT 1094 having held that there can be no claim
Page No.# 6/6
for arrears of money beyond three years from the date of institution of a writ
petition, this Court is of the view that the present case is liable to be dismissed
for laches and delay.
12. In view of the reasons stated above and in view of the fact that there is
delay of more than twenty years in filing the present writ petitions, the writ
petitions are dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
