Orissa High Court
Dr. Pradipta Kumar Gahan vs State Of Odisha And Others on 5 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.A. No.500 of 2023
Dr. Pradipta Kumar Gahan .... Appellant
M/s. K. K. Swain and associates, Advocates
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Respondents
Mr. A. P. Das, ASC
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER
05.04.2023
Order No.
01. 1. The challenge in the present writ appeal is to the judgment dated
24th February, 2023 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing
W.P.(C) No.18092 of 2018 filed by Respondent No.4 and setting
aside an order dated 12th November, 2018 passed by the Deputy
Director (GCB), Directorate of Higher Education, Odisha divesting
Respondent No.4 of all responsibilities of Principal of the Biju
Pattnaik Degree College of Science and Education (hereafter
'College'), Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar and instead approving the
appointment of the Appellant who was the next senior most lecturer
in his place as Principal In-charge-cum-Secretary with powers to
make all financial transactions on behalf of the College.
2. The reasons for the learned Single Judge setting aside the above
order was that although an internal inquiry was conducted by the
College, there was no opportunity granted to Respondent No.4 to
meet the allegations against him and, therefore, the impugned order
was in violation of the principles of natural justice. The learned
Single Judge has further directed that while Respondent No.4
should be reinstated as In-charge Principal within two weeks from
the date of the communication of the order, Respondent No.4
should render full cooperation to the concerned authorities in the
conduct of the inquiry in relation to the allegations level against
him.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the Appellant, the Court is of
the view that the order which divested Respondent No.4 of his
power as In-charge Principal and as a result of which he began
functioning once again as lecturer with the present Appellant who is
junior to him being the In-charge Principal, could not have been
issued without affording the Respondent No.4 an opportunity of
being heard particularly since the allegation was of financial
irregularities which was of grave nature.
4. Learned counsel for the Appellant then submits that even though
an inquiry is now held, inasmuch as Respondent No.4 would be the
Principal In-charge, he may not permit the inquiry to be conducted
in a free and fair manner.
5. It will be for the College authorities as well as the Director,
Higher Education, Odisha to ensure that the outcome of the inquiry
will not be influenced in an unfair manner by the reinstatement of
Respondent No.4 as In-charge Principal. Otherwise, the basic legal
principle on which the learned Single Judge has interfered with the
order dated 12th November, 2018 passed by the Director, Higher
Education cannot be faulted.
6. With the above clarification, the Court declines to interfere with
the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge. The writ
appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
M. Panda
