Decided on April 25,1995


Referred Judgements :-



- (1.)The Court : The writ petitioner was appointed as a temporary Rate Collector of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation in the 1962. The writ petitioner got several promotions in his service and ultimately he was promoted to the post of Sub-Inspector. While serving as Sub-Inspector of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation, the writ petitioner was served on June 30, 1993 with a Memo as per Annexure-A to the writ petition, placing him under suspension with immediate effect as a disciplinary proceeding was contemplated against him. The petitioner was, however, granted the suspension allowance at the prescribed rate.
(2.)According to the petitioner, one Arup Nag was trying to harass him by lodging various false and frivolous complaints with the Police against him. The said Arup Nag also had made an application before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In that application, it was falsely alleged that the writ petitioner had committed an offence under Section 420 of the Indian penal Code. In that application, it was stated by the said Arup Nag that the writ petitioner had prevailed upon him to make over a sum of Rs. 1,70,000/- in cash to the writ petitioner from time to time on various pretexts. When Sri Nag demanded back the said sum of money, the writ petitioner refused or neglected to return the same and absconded from his house. According to Sri Nag, the writ petitioner fraudulently induced him to part with the said sum of money on false pretexts. According to the writ petitioner, investigation of that case is still going on. (It has, however, been submitted by the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner that during the pendency of this writ petition, investigation of that criminal case has been completed and charge-sheet submitted).
(3.)According to the writ petitioner, all the allegations made against him by Sri Nag are false and without any foundation. According to the writ petitioner, he never accepted the said sum of money from Sri Nag as alleged or never persuaded Sri Nag to part with the said sum of money in the manner as alleged. It has been averred in the writ petition that under the Rules framed by the Calcutta Municipal Corporation, charge-sheet was to be submitted within one month from the date of suspension of the employee concerned. Bat in this case, more than three months have elapsed from the date of suspension of the writ petitioner and no charge-sheet was submitted against him. The petitioner through his learned Advocate had sent a letter dated September 4, 1993 to the respondents No. 1 and 3 for withdrawal of the order of his suspension and demanded that he might be allowed to join his duties. A copy of the said letter has been annexed to the writ petition and marked with the letter "D". But in spite of receipt of the said letter, the respondents concerned refused to withdraw or cancel the order of suspension and thereby prevented the writ petitioner from resuming his duties. Thereafter on October 18, 1993 the Assessor Collector of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation (the respondent No. 4 herein) served a Memo. upon the writ petitioner, which was described as a charge-sheet and the same has been quoted verbatim in paragraph 14 of the writ petition. According to the writ petitioner, it will appear from the said imputation of misconduct and/or charge-sheet that the entire case made out by the respondents is based on or are directly related to the subject matter of the criminal case pending against the writ petitioner. It has been stated by the writ petitioner that as the subject matter of enquiry in the departmental proceeding as also the subject matter of trial in the criminal case against him are the same and identical, the two things cannot proceed together and therefore, the departmental proceeding must be stayed until disposal of the criminal case as otherwise he would be compelled to disclose his defence in the criminal case. According to the writ petitioner, in spite of repeated demands and requests of the writ petitioner, the respondents have signally failed to act in accordance with their legal obligations. Therefore, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the arbitrary, illegal and unauthorised action of the respondents, the writ petitioner has come before this Court for reliefs, inter alia, that (a) a writ of mandamus directing the respondents and/or each, of them to act in accordance with law by withdrawing and/or cancelling the impugned charge-sheet, being Annexure-E to the writ petition; (b) a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents and/or each of them to revoke or withdraw the impugned order of suspension, being Annexure-A to the writ petition ; (c) a writ of certiorari directing the respondents and/or each of them to transmit and certify all the records and documents relating to this case to this Court for doing conscionable justice by this Court; etc. etc.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.