Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1244 (JHR)

Satya Narayan Prasad v. Union of India

2009-09-05

D.K.SINHA, GYAN SUDHA MISRA

body2009
Order This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 11.7.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 6425/2007, by which the writ petition was dismissed. Consequently the order passed by the disciplinary authority against the delinquent appellant, wherein the penalty of reduction of salary by one stage which is Rs. 4,135/- to Rs; 4,050/- in the time scale of pay, for a period of two years with immediate effect, was upheld. He was also awarded punishment of restraint on earning increments of pay during the period of reduction of salary. 2. The aforesaid order of punishment was imposed on the petitioner-appellant herein on the charge that while he was posted as Havildar at Bacheli in the State of Karnataka, he had gone to visit a constable who was admitted in NMDC Appolo Central Hospital at Bacheli, but unfortunately the constable died, after which there was commotion in the hospital, alleging negligence on the part of the Doctors. The appellant was alleged to have provoked the mob in the hospital, as a result of which the hospital premises was ran- sacked and the windowpanes and doors were damaged and he was also alleged to have insulted the superior officers. On account of this incident, a memorandum of charge was served on the appellant and thereafter an enquiry was also initiated against him, in which the appellant duly participated where he had full opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses who had been produced. 3. The Enquiry Officer, after scrutiny of the attending circumstances in the light of the evidence produced, was pleased to hold that the petitioner-appellant was guilty of misconduct and dereliction of duty to the extent that he had instigated and provoked the mob in the hospital and had also insulted the Officers of C.I.S.F. Consequently a punishment of reduction of salary by one stage from Rs. 4,135/- to Rs. 4,050/- in the time scale of pay for a period of two years with immediate effect was imposed; as already referred to hereinbefore. He was further awarded punishment of not earning increments of pay during the period of reduction of salary. 4. 4,135/- to Rs. 4,050/- in the time scale of pay for a period of two years with immediate effect was imposed; as already referred to hereinbefore. He was further awarded punishment of not earning increments of pay during the period of reduction of salary. 4. The delinquent appellant, feeling aggrieved by the order of the disciplinary authority, filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge and the learned Single Judge was pleased to observe that in view of the impugned order passed by the disciplinary authority as well as appellate authority, who have fully discussed and considered the evidence and materials on record and thereafter arrived that the guilt of the accused petitioner was fully established, there is no lack of infirmity in the impugned order. The petitioner-appellant, feeling aggrieved with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, preferred this appeal. 5. Counsel for the appellant, in support of the appeal, submitted that the order of penalty is fit to be quashed and set aside as it could not be proved that the petitioner-appellant was present at the place of incident. He further submitted that that even assuming that he was present at the-place of incident, he had merely demanded the registration of the first information report in regard to the death of the constable who died on account of negligence of the Doctors. Thus, he denied that he had instigated the mob in the hospital or provoked them to indulge in rans8cking the hospital and creating disturbance. 6. These arguments obviously are in the nature of reappreciation of evidence and it need not be reiterated that the appellate forum is not the appropriate stage where the finding recorded by the Enquiry Officer in regard to the evidence can be scrutinized especially when the appellant had sufficient opportunity to demolish the case of the authority. The petitioner-appellant had failed to discharge his legal obligation and the same had also been gone into by the learned Single Judge. In fact, to satisfy our conscience, fairplay and justice, we have perused the enquiry report and the conclusions which have been recorded by the Enquiry Officer, but we do not find any infirmity in the same so as to hold that the same is perverse in any manner which required interference. 7. In fact, to satisfy our conscience, fairplay and justice, we have perused the enquiry report and the conclusions which have been recorded by the Enquiry Officer, but we do not find any infirmity in the same so as to hold that the same is perverse in any manner which required interference. 7. It was also brought to the notice of this Court by the counsel for the respondent-Union of India that the enquiry report was duly served on the appellant and his - appeal was also considered on merit by the appellate authority and therefore, the order passed by the disciplinary authority requires no interference. Besides this, the nature of punishment imposed is merely reduction of salary for a period of two years and that cannot be held to be disproportionate to the magnitude of the charge of misconduct which has been proved against the appellant, so as to impress upon this Court to interfere with the impugned order. 8. The appeal has, thus, no substance and is dismissed at the admission stage itself.