Orissa High Court
Jagannath Sethy vs State Of Odisha And Others on 10 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.14582 of 2022
Jagannath Sethy .... Petitioner
Mr. Sanjib Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. Saswat Das, A.G.A.
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 10.05.2023
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned
Additional Government Advocate. Perused the Writ Petition as well
as the documents annexed hereto.
3. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the
Petitioner that during pendency of criminal trial, filing of defence by
the Petitioner in the disciplinary proceeding will jeopardize the
prospect of the delinquent-Petitioner involved in the criminal case,
this Court finds support for the submission of learned counsel in the
aforesaid context from the decision of the Hon'ble apex Court
reported in AIR 1999 SC 1416, decided taking support of the old
decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in AIR 1965 SC 155.
Similar view has also been taken in a judgment reported in (2012) 1
SCC- 442.
4. By filing the present writ petition, the Petitioner has prayed for
stay of the Departmental Proceeding bearing R.D. department
// 2 //
Memorandum No.2886011100422022/RD dated 12.01.2023 under
annexure-4 involving the Petitioner till finalization of the Criminal
Trial vide Berhampur Vigilance P.S. Case No.03 of 2022.
5. Learned counsel for the State draws the attention of this Court
to the charges framed by Criminal Court and in the Departmental
Proceeding and contends that the departmental proceeding has been
initiated against Petitioner for failure to maintain absolute integrity
and honesty and gross misconduct and, as such, the charges in both
the cases are different. Therefore, he submits that the ratio decided in
aforesaid Supreme Court judgments are not applicable to the facts of
the present case and the departmental proceeding against the
Petitioner should not be stayed awaiting the verdict in criminal case
and further prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. This Court on a careful scrutiny of the charges in both
proceedings partly agrees with the submission made by Mr. Das,
learned Additional Government Advocate the state. The charges in
criminal case no doubt forms the basis for the initiation of D.P. in
addition to the charge that such information was not disclosed to the
employer by the employee in violation of the service Rules.
However, this Court is also of the view that while continuing with
the D.P. the Petitioner would be required to disclose his defence
which might be detrimental to his interest involved in the criminal
trial.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon a
careful analysis of the rival contentions and upon a scrutiny of the
writ petition and the documents attached to it, this Court in the
greater interest of justice deems it proper to dispose of the writ
// 3 //
petition by directing that the Departmental Proceeding against the
Petitioner shall remain stayed for a period of one year from the date
of this order. Further, on production of a certified copy of this order
by the Petitioner, the Court in seisin of the trial of the case arising
out of Berhanpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.03 of 2022 under Section
13(2) read with 13(i)(b)/12 of P.C.Act, 1988 of the P.C. Act shall
expedite the trial and make every endeavour to conclude the trial
within one year. Parties are directed to cooperate with the trial court.
8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ
application is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
RKS
RAMESH Digitally signed by
RAMESH KUMAR
KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2023.05.12
SINGH 14:31:04 +05'30'
