Orissa High Court
Manoranjan Pattnayak vs State Of Odisha And Others on 12 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WPC(OAC) No. 3229 of 2014
Manoranjan Pattnayak .... Petitioner
Mr. Janaki Kanta Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. R.N.Mishra, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 12.4.2022
1. 1. This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.
2. It is submitted by Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel
that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the
petitioner.
3. The Original Application having been transferred
from the learned Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack
Bench, Cuttack upon its abolition, has been registered
before this Court on 11.12.2021.
4. On perusal of the available order sheets of the learned
Tribunal it is indicated that the matter was taken up on
3.11.2014, notices were issued and interim order was
passed :
"So far as the prayer for interim relief is
concerned, no order pursuant to the notice as
at Annexure-8 be passed without considering
the show-cause filed by the applicant."
5. The matter was never taken up/pursued thereafter.
6. Referring to the counter affidavit, learned AGA submits
that the petitioner was put under suspension in view of the
detention in custody for a period exceeding forty-eight hours.
When the petitioner was working as a Junior Clerk in the
// 2 //
office of the Child Development Project Officer, Rayagada, a
departmental proceeding was drawn up against him under
Rule 15 of the Orissa Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1962. It is
further submitted that the averments made in the O.A. to
the effect that the petitioner was not given opportunity, is
not correct. To that effect averments made in the counter as
relied upon by the learned AGA, are quoted herein :
"7. That in reply to Para-6.7, it is to submit
that the enquiry report in Departmental
Proceeding No.671, dated `8.05.2010 drawn up
against the applicant was received vide letter
No. 5231, dt.13.10.2011 of Sub-Collector,
Rayagada. A copy of the same was served
upon the applicant on 17.12.2011 directing him
to furnish his representation, if any, he wishes
to make against the findings of the Enquiring
Officer within 15 days. But the applicant did
not furnish any representation on the findings
of the enquiry report."
7. It is further submitted that the petitioner was convicted
by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Jeypore vide
judgment dated 26.8.2014 under sections 7/13(2)/13(1)(d)
of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 sentencing him to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year, pay fine of
Rs.10,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for six months on each count for the
offences.
8. It is further submitted that the order of conviction has
not been stayed in the CRLA No.449 of 2014 filed by the
applicant before this Court. Relying on the averments made
in the counter affidavit, provisions in terms of Rule 15 of the
OCS (CCA) Rules, 1962 and the Article 311 of the
Constitution of India, it is contended by learned AGA that
the petitioner is liable to be dismissed from service in view of
conviction in the criminal case.
// 3 //
9. Having heard learned AGA to grant another opportunity
to the petitioner, list on 18.5.2022.
Copy of the order be uploaded immediately.
(M.S.Sahoo)
Judge
dutta
