Tripura High Court
For vs For on 16 December, 2022
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WA NO. 161/2021
For Appellant(s) : Mr Subrata Sarkar. Sr. Advocate.
Mr. K.D. Singha, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Sarma, Addl. G.A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY
ORDER
16/12/2022
Heard Mr. Subrata Sarkar, learned senior counsel assisted by
Mr. K. D. Singha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard
Mr. D. Sarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the State-respondents.
[2] Briefly stated, a departmental proceeding was initiated against
the appellant framing charges that he had forged his Scheduled Castes(SC)
Certificate.
[3] A criminal complaint also was lodged against him. The
learned Court below took cognizance of the complaint and proceeded with
the trial. It is informed at the Bar that the criminal trial is going on.
[4] The appellant-petitioner, by way of filing a writ petition
before this Court had prayed for staying the departmental proceedings
initiated against him by the concerned Department of the respondents.
[5] The learned Single Judge by an order dated 29.04.2021 passed
in WP(C) No. 325 of 2021 had declined to interfere with the departmental
proceedings with the following observations:
"The common thread running through all these judgments as
also those cited by the counsel for the petitioner is that there is no bar
on departmental proceedings continuing when criminal trial is pending.
Only when it is shown that the case involves grave charges and
complicated questions of facts and law, the Court may suspend a
departmental proceeding till criminal trial is over.
However, in the present case, none of these factors are present.
The allegation against the petitioner in the departmental inquiry is that
by forging the caste certificate he secured his employment against a
reserved vacancy and thereby committed misconduct. The charge in the
criminal case is of forgery of a document which is punishable under
Sections 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code. It is reiterated by the
Supreme Court on number of occasions that a departmental inquiry
must be completed as expeditiously as possible so that the Government
servant if found guilty of misconduct, he is visited the punishment
commensurate with the proved charge. On the other hand, if he is
innocent, he must be exonerated and his reputation should be restored.
Under the circumstances, petition is dismissed."
[6] We have given our thoughtful consideration to the findings of
the learned Single Judge. According to us, the allegation levelled against
the appellant is that he had forged his SC Certificate.
[7] In our opinion, there is a little scope of the Department to say
and prove as to whether the document is forged or not. It may be the
concern of the State Level Scrutiny Committee(SLSC) in terms of the
provisions laid down in the Tripura Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes Reservation Act, 1991. A criminal court can come to a conclusion
whether the document is forged or not following the provisions of the
Evidence Act, since a complaint was lodged against the appellant-
petitioner complaining that he had entered into service by producing a
fake/forged SC Certificate.
The issue raised here, according to us, is of grave nature and
complicated.
[8] In the light of the above discussions, we are constrained to
observe that this is a fit case to stay the continuation of the departmental
proceedings initiated by the respondents till the final outcome of the
criminal case now pending against the appellant-petitioner.
Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order dated
29.04.2021, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.325 of 2021
stands set aside and quashed.
With the above observations and directions, the instant writ
appeal stands allowed.
JUDGE JUDGE
paritosh
