Pramod Kumar Mohanty vs State Of Odisha And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1979 Ori

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1979 Ori
Judgement Date : 9 March, 2023

Orissa High Court

Pramod Kumar Mohanty vs State Of Odisha And Ors on 9 March, 2023

A.F.R.         ORISSA HIGH COURT : C U T T A C K
                                W.P.(C) NO.2349 OF 2017
                        An application under Articles 226 & 227 of
                                 the Constitution of India.


         Pramod Kumar Mohanty                                             : Petitioner

                                            -Versus-

         State of Odisha and ors.                                  :Opposite Parties


               For Petitioner                      : Ms. B.K.Pattnaik, Advocate

               For O.Ps.                           : Mr. S. Mishra,
                                                     Additional Standing Counsel

                                            JUDGMENT

CORAM :

JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH

Date of Hearing & Judgment : 09.03.2023

1. This Application involves the following prayer:-

"In view of the facts stated above in Para-6, the applicant prays for the following relief(s):

(i) To quash the departmental proceeding initiated against on 28.07.2016 vide Annexure-2.

(ii) To quash the appointment of enquiry officer under Annexure-4.

(iii) And pass such other order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper for the interest of justice."

2. Factual background involved herein, Petitioner was duly

selected and appointed as LD Assistant on 18.12.1976, where after

// 2 //

the Petitioner joined as a Steno Sub-Inspector on 04.02.1978.

Petitioner while continuing as such in June, 1986 was appointed as

S.I. of Police; in the meantime he was promoted to the post of

Inspector of Police on 24.01.1994. While continuing as such he

was promoted to the rank of Dy. Superintendent of Police on

19.03.2005 then again to the rank of Additional S.P. on 23.03.2013

and finally got superannuated from his service on 30.04.2014. On

attaining the age of superannuation, it appears, while the Petitioner

was employed as OSD on contractual basis against a vacant post of

DSP in State HRPC (Human Right Protection Cell) for a period of

one year from the date of his joining, Petitioner joining the said

post on 24.10.2014 was discharged from contractual service on

23.10.2015. When the Petitioner superannuated from 30.04.2014,

he was charged with departmental proceeding being initiated on

28.07.2016 under Rule 15 of Odisha Civil Services (Classification

Control and Appeal) Rules, 1962 read together with Rule-7(ii) of

O.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1992. As a consequence a memorandum of

charges involving some incident taking place during the period

from 2002 to 2004 came to be surfaced.

3. It is on the premises that the prohibition of initiation of

departmental proceeding after four years of incident taking place

// 3 //

involving the superannuated employee, learned counsel for the

Petitioner taking this Court to the initiation of criminal proceeding

vide P.S. Case No. 32 of 2002 further involving incident taking

place in between 2002 to 2004 resulting the initiation of

disciplinary proceeding in 2016, here taking this Court to the

provision at Rule 7(b)(ii), reading through the same, learned

counsel appearing for the Petitioner contested the initiation of

departmental proceeding vide Annexure-2. It is in the premises and

for undisputed facts for initiation of the proceeding in clear

contravention of Rule-7(b)(ii), Ms. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the

Petitioner requested this Court for interfering with the impugned

order at Annexure-2 and setting aside the same. Ms. Pattnaik,

learned counsel also draws attention of this Court to the interim

direction passed in undertaking of the exercise in this matter by the

State Administrative Tribunal by its order dated 06.09.2017 and

submits that there is already stay of departmental proceeding by

such order which position is even continuing as on date.

4. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel, however

while admitting that incident involving year 2002 to 2004 for there

being clear disclosure of material available herein and the

disciplinary proceeding got initiated in 2016 and that the Petitioner

// 4 //

got superannuated in 2014, however taking this Court to the serious

implication involving the criminal proceeding already involving the

Petitioner undertaken since 2002 vide P.S. Case No. 38 of 2002

submits that there should not be easy letting of such person and in

such event it will create a bad precedent in working atmosphere of

the establishment involved. There is however no dispute to the

legal provision through Rule-7(b)(ii) clearly prohibiting initiation

of departmental proceeding after four years of incident taking place

in case of superannuated employees.

5. Considering rival contentions of the Parties, this Court finds,

undisputed facts remain the Petitioner got superannuated on

30.04.2014, the disciplinary proceeding involved was initiated on

28.07.2016. This Court takes up the Rule applied herein to the

consideration fold to find Rule-7(b)(ii):

"Right of Government to withhold or withdraw pension-

(b) Such departmental proceedings as referred to in Sub-rule (1) if not instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his re- employment-