Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Prabhat Kumar Mallik vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2657 Ori

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2657 Ori
Judgement Date : 19 March, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Prabhat Kumar Mallik vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ... on 19 March, 2026

Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                            WP(C ) No.6350 of 2024

         Prabhat Kumar Mallik            ....              Petitioner
                                                Mr. P.K. Mohapatra,
                                                               Adv.


                                   -versus-

         State of Odisha & Others        ....        Opposite Party
                                               Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA

                        COROM:
    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

                                    ORDER
Order                             19.03.2026
No

4. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging the order of punishment passed against the Petitioner in a Proceeding initiated vide Memorandum dt.04.11.2019 under Annexure-1, vide order dt.14.09.2021 under Annexure-4 of Opp. party No.3, and confirmation of the same in Appeal by Opp. party No.2 vide order dt.02.11.2023 under Anenxure-6.

4. While assailing both the orders, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that in the Proceeding so initiated vide Memorandum dt.04.11.2019 // 2 //

under Annexure-1, the Inquiry Officer submitted the report on 04.11.2019 under Annexure-3.

4.1 Even though the Proceeding was initiated under Rule- 15 of the Rules, but Opp. party No.3 being the Disciplinary Authority without issuing the 1st show-cause, as provided under Rule 15(10)(i)(a) of the Rules, straightaway issued the 2nd show-cause by proposing the punishment vide the show-cause notice dt.25.06.2021 under Annexure-3.

4.2. It is also contended that while issuing such a 2nd show-cause, no dis-agreement note was provided, on the face of the finding of the Inquiry Officer, which was a mandatory requirement. It is accordingly contended that since provisions contained under Rule-15(10)(i)(a) & 15(10(i)(b) of the Rules were never followed, which is apparent on the face of the notice issued under Annexure- 3, the impugned order so passed in the proceeding vide order dt.14.09.2021 under Anenxure-4 and confirmed by the Appellate Authority vide order dt.02.11.2023 under Annexure-6, are not sustainable in the eye of law.

Rule-15-(10(i)(a) & 15(10)(i)(b) of the Rules reads as follows:

15(10(i)(a)- If the inquiring officer is not the disciplinary authority shall furnish to the delinquent Government servant a copy of the inquiring officer and give him notice by registered post or otherwise calling upon him to submit within a period of fifteen days such representation as he may wish to make against finding of the Inquiring Authority.

// 3 //

15(10(i)(b)- On receipt of the representation referred to in Sub-clause(a), the disciplinary authority having regard to the findings on the charges, is of the opinion that any of the penalties specified in Clauses (vi) to (ix) of Rule 13 should be imposed. He shall furnish to the delinquent Government servant a statement of its findings along with brief reasons for disagreement, if any, with the finds of the inquiring officer and give him a notice by Registered post or otherwise stating the penalty proposed to be imposed on him and calling upon him to submit within a specified time such representation as he may wish to make against the proposed penalty.

5. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand while supporting the impugned order contended that since after receipt of the inquiry report, it was found that Petitioner has been found guilty of the charges, the Disciplinary Authority after going through the inquiry report, issued the 2nd show-cause vide notice dt.25.06.2021 under Annexure- 3 proposing the punishment therein. It is contended that Petitioner without raising any objection, filed his reply and after due consideration of the same, the Proceeding was disposed of vide the impugned order dt.14.09.2021 under Annexure-4.

5.1. Not only that, appeal filed against the said order was also dismissed by Opp. party No.2 vide order dt.02.11.2023 under Anenxure-6. It is contended that since the order of punishment so passed by the Disciplinary Authority under Annexure-4, has been upheld by the Appellate authority, no illegality or irregularity can be found with the impugned order.

// 4 //

Not only that, Petitioner since never raised any objection to the 2nd show-cause and instead filed his reply, Petitioner cannot be permitted to take the plea regarding non-compliance of Rule-15(10(i)(a) of the Rules.

6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the submission made, this Court finds that the proceeding initiated against the Petitioner vide memorandum dt.04.11.2019 under Annexure-1. After receipt of the inquiry report on 04.11.2019, Opp. party No.3, who happens to be the Disciplinary Authority, without following the provisions contained under Rule 15(10)(i)(a) of the Rules, straightaway issued the 2nd show- cause as provided under Rule 15(10)(i)(b) of the Rules by proposing the punishment.

6.1. Since from the impugned 2nd show-cause, it is apparent that no 1st show-cause was ever issued in terms of the Rule-15(10)(i)(a) of the Rules which amounts of non- compliance of the statutory provision and there is no disagreement note while issuing the 2nd show-cause notice, this Court on that ground only is inclined to quash order dt.14.09.2021 so passed by Opp. party No.3 under Annexure-4, confirmed by the Appellate Authority-Opp. party No.2 vide order dt.02.11.2023 under Annexure-6. While quashing both the orders, this Court remits the Proceeding to Opp. party No.3 with a direction to re- commence the same from the stage of issuance of the 1st

// 5 //

show-cause, in terms of the provisions contained under Rule-15(10(i)(a) of the Rules.

6.2. Since the Proceeding is of the year 2019 and inquiry report has already been submitted, Opp. party No.3 is directed to dispose of the Proceeding as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 4(four) months hence. Petitioner however is directed to cooperate for such disposal.

7. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita

Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cuttack Date: 24-Mar-2026 16:37:41

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter