Orissa High Court
Kailash Chandra Swain vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 9 April, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.26008 of 2024
Kailash Chandra Swain ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Karunakar Rath
-versus-
State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. - M/s.
Tanmay Mishra,s.senapati
M/s. Panchanan Panigrahi,
S.k. Sahoo, R.r.parida, Mr.
M.R. Patra, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
09.04.2025
Order No.
05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the State-Opposite Parties and Mr. Mishra, learned
counsel for the Opposite Party No.6. Perused the writ application as
well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the
following prayer:
"Therefore it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court
would graciously be pleased to admit the writ
application, call for the record, issue the rule
NISI, callings upon the opposite parties to show
cause as to why the final pension, gratuity &
leave salary of the petitioner shall not be
released, failing to show cause showing
insufficient cause issue the writ of mandamus
directing the opposite parties to sanction the
arrear final pension, gratuity, leave salary with
interest in the light of the judgement by the
Supreme court in the case of Captain in Paul
versus Bharat Gold Mines Ltd reported in 1999
(3 SCC 679);
And pass any other order/ orders,
direction/directions as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper,"
4. By filing the present petition the Petitioner seeks for a
direction to the Opposite Parties to sanction the arrear final pension,
gratuity, leave salary with interest in the light of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Captain M. Paul Anthony v.
Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. reported in (1999) 3 SCC 679.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that
the Petitioner initially entered into service on 30.08.1971 as Tax
Sarkar in Jajpur N.A.C. Thereafter, he was transferred to Kendrapara
Municipality on 26.06.2002. While he was continuing under the
Kendrapara Municipality, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated
against him vide memo dated 29.09.2002 on the allegation of
misappropriation of some money belonging to the Municipaltiy.
After receiving the memo of charge the Petitioner submitted his
written statement of defense on 29.10.2002. Learned counsel for the
Petitioner at this juncture contended that since 2002 the disciplinary
proceeding which was initiated against the Petitioner is still pending
and the same has not been finalized. He further contended that in the
meantime the Petitioner, on attaining the age of superannuation, has
retired from the service w.e.f. 28.02.2014 while he was working
under the Executive Officer, Bhuban, NAC-Opposite Party No.8.
After the retirement, although the Petitioner approached the Opposite
Parties for sanction and disbursal of his retiral dues, however, no
steps have been taken on the ground that the disciplinary proceeding
which was initiated in the year 2002 is still pending against him.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended
that the disciplinary proceeding which is pending for more than two
decades could not be finalized by the Opposite Parties, as a result of
which, the Petitioner has suffered a lot financially and he has not
been paid his retiral dues as well as pensionary benefits. He further
contended that in the meantime the Petitioner has already deposited
the alleged misappropriated amount on 06.02.2024. In the aforesaid
context, he further submitted that the Executive Officer, Kendrapara
Municipality has already issued an NOC in favour of the Petitioner
on 15.02.2024. Finally, the Petitioner submitted a representation on
18.02.2024 under Annexure-6 to the writ petition before the
Collector & District Magistrate, Dhenkanal for redressal of his
grievance. However, no decision has been taken by the Collector &
District Magistrate, Dhenkanal as of now.
7. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.6 on the
other hand contended that although the disciplinary proceeding is
pending since 2002, however, in the meantime the Opposite Party
No.6 has sought for clarification vide letter No.3730 dated
24.09.2024 under Annexure-5 to the writ petition from the Director
Municipal Administration, Government of Odisha-Opposite Party
No.3. Further, referring to the letter dated 24.09.2024, learned
counsel for the Opposite Party No.6 submitted that no enquiring
officer has been appointed to the departmental proceeding which is
pending since 2002. Further, such letter reveals that the Petitioner has
deposited the alleged misappropriated amount on 06.02.2024, as
such, the audit objection has been complied with. It further reveals
that there is no outstanding due against the present Petitioner and
accordingly, an NOC has also been issued in favour of the present
Petitioner. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, the EO, Kendrapara
Municipality has sought for instruction from the Office of the
Opposite Party No.3. Awaiting such instruction no final decision has
been taken in the matter of the present Petitioner. In such view of the
matter, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.6 submitted that
the present writ petition is devoid of merit and the same should be
dismissed at the threshold.
8. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties, on a careful analysis of their submission and on a close
scrutiny of the factual background of the present case as well as the
documents annexed to the writ petition, it is observed that the
disciplinary proceeding which was initiated in the year 2002 is still
pending although more than two decades have been elapsed in the
meantime. Moreover, no inquiry officer has been appointed till date,
as is evident from the letter dated 24.09.2024. In the meantime, the
Petitioner has retired since 2014, i.e. for more than decade. The letter
24.09.2024, further clearly reveals that the alleged misappropriated
amount has already been recovered and the objection has been
complied with. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, all these
observations are based on the letter of the E.O., Kendrapara
Municipality under Annexure-5 to the writ petition. Therefore, the
same cannot be disputed by the parties to the present writ petition.
Considering the aforesaid facts and further taking into consideration
the fact that the disciplinary proceeding is pending for more than two
decades with no enquiring officer being appointed as of now, and in
addition to the same the aforesaid facts the alleged misappropriated
amount has already been recovered in the meantime and an NOC has
been issued in favour of the Petitioner, this Court is of the view that
further continuance of the disciplinary proceeding more than after a
decade after the date of Petitioner's retirement, is not be the larger
interests of justice. Further, the pendency of the disciplinary
proceeding would stand in the way of the Petitioner in getting his
legitimate dues as he is entitled to. In such view of the matter, this
Court has no hesitation to quash the pending disciplinary proceeding
against the present Petitioner. Accordingly, the same is hereby
quashed. Further, the Opposite Parties are directed to take necessary
steps to sanction and disburse the retiral dues as well as the
pensionary benefits as is due and admissible to the Petitioner within a
period of two months from the date of communication of a certified
copy of this order.
9. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application
stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Page 5 of 5.
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 15-Apr-2025 10:54:03
