Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 154 (TRI)

Khokan Chandra Das v. State of Tripura

2014-04-30

U.B.SAHA

body2014
JUDGMENT Utpalendu Bikas Saha, J.:- The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner namely, Sri Khokan Chandra Das for quashing the order dated 10.08.2006 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) passed by the Disciplinary Authority whereby and whereunder the Disciplinary Authority withheld three increments in the time scale of pay of the petitioner with cumulative effect and also for quashing the order of the Appellate Authority dated 02.04.2007 (Annexure-10 to the writ petition) wherein the appellate authority, affirmed the order of the disciplinary authority while dismissing the appeal. 2. Brief facts needed to be discussed are as follows:- The petitioner, Inspector of Taxes, was placed under suspension vide order dated 11.10.2004 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) and thereafter on 24.01.2005 a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner on the following Article of Charge:- Sri Khokan Chandra Das, Inspector of Taxes (now under suspension) was appointed as Inspector of Taxes vide Order No. F. IV-3(12)/TAX/96/10040-049 dated 26/06/1997 and joined in the post on 07/07/1997. While Sri Das functioning as Inspector of Taxes at the office of the Superintendent of Taxes, Udaipur submitted two false inquiry report against application for registration under TST & CST Act submitted by one Sri Rabindra Das and another Sri Sanjoy Das of Salgara, Udaipur, stated to be the proprietor of M/S. Joykali Varieties and M/S. Priya Varieties. Sri Khokan Chandra Das also gave incorrect information in his inquiry report submitted to the superintendent of Taxes, Udaipur regarding existence of establishments of aforesaid dealers and regarding their dealing in taxable goods for enabling them to obtain permits for import of taxable goods. By this act Sri Das failed to maintain devotion to duty and did an act which is unbecoming of a Government employee and violated Rule 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii) and 3(1)(iii) of the Tripura Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1988. 3. In response to the aforesaid charge the petitioner, filed a written statement denying each and every charge. Being unsatisfied with the written statement of the petitioner, the Disciplinary Authority appointed one Sri K Chakraborty, Addl. Commissioner of Departmental Inquiries, Government of Tripura to inquire into the charges. The Inquiring Authority, upon recording of evidence, found the petitioner guilty for violation of Clause-i, Clause-ii and Clause-iii of Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 3 of Tripura Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1988. 4. Commissioner of Departmental Inquiries, Government of Tripura to inquire into the charges. The Inquiring Authority, upon recording of evidence, found the petitioner guilty for violation of Clause-i, Clause-ii and Clause-iii of Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 3 of Tripura Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1988. 4. On receipt of the said inquiry report, the Disciplinary Authority passed the impugned order of punishment, as stated supra, which is upheld by the Appellate Authority in the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition. 5. The State respondents denied the contention of the petitioner in the writ petition and supported the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority as well as the Appellate Authority. 6. Mr. Bhattacharjee, while urging for quashing the orders, as impugned herein, submits that neither the Disciplinary Authority nor the Appellate Authority passed a reasoned order. He further submits that it would meet justice if the order passed by the Appellate Authority is set aside and the matter remitted back to the Appellate Authority for deciding afresh, by a reasoned order, even without interfering with the order of the Disciplinary Authority. 7. Mr. Nath while supporting the impugned orders submits that the respondents have proved their case before the inquiring authority on the basis of which the Disciplinary Authority passed the order and as the Appellate Authority agreed with the findings of the Disciplinary Authority, thus it is not necessary for him to give reasons for dismissing the appeal. He further submits that a writ court can only interfere with an order passed in a disciplinary proceeding when the said order is either perverse or if at the time of disciplinary proceeding, the prescribed procedure was not followed but a writ court cannot act as an appellate authority. 8. There is no doubt that the power of the writ court is very limited so far an order passed in a disciplinary proceeding is concerned, but when the appellate authority decided an appeal without hearing the appellant and also without considering the grounds taken by the appellant in his memo of appeal, more so, when the order is so cryptic, the Court cannot be a mere spectator. In the instant case, as Mr. Bhattacharjee mainly attacked the order passed by the Appellate Authority, it would be proper for this Court reproduce the same. Accordingly, the relevant portion of the order of the Appellate Authority is reproduced hereinunder:- ................ In the instant case, as Mr. Bhattacharjee mainly attacked the order passed by the Appellate Authority, it would be proper for this Court reproduce the same. Accordingly, the relevant portion of the order of the Appellate Authority is reproduced hereinunder:- ................ Order This is an appeal petition dated 30 August 2006 filed by Shri Khokan Chandra Das, Inspector of Tax, O/O Commissioner Taxes, Agartala against the order of penalty passed by the Disciplinary authority on 10 august 2006. Since, the appeal petition is filed within the prescribe time, the same is taken up for consideration and disposal. 2. I have gone through the appeal and the records of the case placed before me. I find that the appeal does not contain any new facts which were not raised during the enquiry stage. I also do not find that the appeal petition contains any facts which are extenuating in nature. 3. Therefore, on application of judicious mind and after careful and sympathetic consideration of the matter I find that there is no reason of interfere with the order passed against Shri Das by the Disciplinary Authority. His appeal is accordingly rejected. 4. Inform all concerned and send copies. ...... 9. From the aforesaid order of the Appellate Authority it appears that the Appellate Authority even did not consider to see the memo of appeal (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) wherein the appellant put forward so many grounds including the ground that the inquiry report is based on no evidence and the same is also perverse. The Appellate Authority also in its order did not say anything about the findings of the Inquiring Authority as well as the Disciplinary Authority, rather dismissed the appeal saying, inter alia, that " I find that the appeal does not contain any new facts which were not raised during the enquiry stage. I also do not find that the appeal petition contains any facts which are extenuating in nature." According to this Court, the said order being not a reasoned order is required to be interfered with. 10. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Authority is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the Appellate Authority, i.e. the Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Department of Finance for hearing the appeal of the petitioner afresh, after providing him personal hearing, and for deciding the matter in accordance with law. 10. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Authority is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the Appellate Authority, i.e. the Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Department of Finance for hearing the appeal of the petitioner afresh, after providing him personal hearing, and for deciding the matter in accordance with law. The Appellate Authority is also directed to decide the appeal preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order, as the order of the disciplinary authority was passed on 10.08.2006. 11. This Court is not expressing any opinion regarding the findings of the inquiring authority as well as the order of the Disciplinary Authority as that would affect the merit of the appeal. 12. With the aforesaid order, the instant writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.