JUDGEMENT
PRAMATH PATNAIK,J. -
(1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has
inter alia prayed for quashing of the order dated 31.05.2009 passed by
the respondent no.3 pertaining to infliction of punishment of award of
black mark for the alleged misconduct and the order by the appellate
authority dated 15.02.2010.
(2.) Sans details, the facts as disclosed in the writ application, that while the petitioner was continuing as officer In-charge of Amlabad
Outpost, he was issued a charge-sheet dated 23.12.2008 for the alleged
misconduct for not issuing release order of transfer to one Vishawanth
Singh. Similarly, other three police officers In-charge including the
petitioner were charge-sheeted for the same misconduct for not relieving
the police personnel within 24 hours. It has also averred in the writ
application that three police officers In-charge namely Ramlal Ram,
Chunmun Singh and the petitioner were charge-sheeted for the same
misconduct. In pursuance to the aforesaid charge, inquiry officer was
appointed and the inquiry officer submitted the report. On the basis of
the inquiry report, the petitioner was found guilty partially and the
disciplinary authority on the basis of the inquiry report has imposed
punishment dated 31.05.2009 the infliction of punishment of award of
black mark. Being aggrieved by the order, the petitioner preferred an
appeal before the appellate authority i.e. respondent no. 2 and the
appellate authority rejected the appeal vide order dated 15.02.2010 in a
very cryptic and non-reasoned manner.
(3.) Mr. Sidhartha Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that in the proceeding, no enquiry report supplied to the
petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
disciplinary authority while analysing the inquiry report differed with
the findings of the inquiry officer and without assigning reasons for his
difference and without giving petitioner any opportunity of hearing has
imposed a major punishment of black mark which has grossly vitiated
disciplinary proceeding. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that similarly situated employees like Chunmun Singh who was
proceeded on the self same charges has been inflicted with the minor
punishment of censure so the petitioner is entitled to be extended with
the doctrine of parity of punishment so far as the impugned order of
punishment is concerned.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.