LAWS(ORI)-2014-9-76

PRASANNA KUMAR PATI Vs. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Decided On September 04, 2014
Prasanna Kumar Pati Appellant
V/S
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed seeking quashment of the order of dismissal dated 12.12.2011 vide Annexure -7 further seeking a direction to the opposite party no.2 to give an opportunity of personal hearing before passing final order as against show -cause notice dated 22.08.2011 imposing major penalty.

(2.) THE facts of the case in the writ petition as borne out from the narrations in the writ petition and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner while working as a line -man vide Departmental Proceeding No.9388 dated 28.12.2007 in Central Electricity Supply Utility of Odisha (for short 'the CESU') a departmental proceeding was initiated against him and he remained under suspension vide office order dated 20.11.2007. The petitioner was also served with supplementary charge -sheet No.1550 dated 14.03.2008. The article of charges as framed against the petitioner is as follows: -

(3.) THE said departmental proceeding was concluded on submission of a report by the Enquiring Officer with a finding that the charges framed against the petitioner are established. Basing on report of the Enquiring Officer dated 12.08.2011 as appearing at Annexure - 2, a show -cause notice dated 22.08.2011 as appearing at Annexure -1 was served on the petitioner to show -cause within 48 hours as to why the proposed major punishment of dismissal from service should not be awarded to him in consideration of the findings and recommendation of the Enquiring Officer, petitioner could not be able to file a reply within this limited period for which he requested for extension of time which was turned down. The disciplinary authority of the Central Electricity Supply Utility of Odisha passed final order of punishment by dismissing the petitioner from service with effect from 25.08.2011 under Annexure -4 for his proved misconduct falling within the meaning of Clause - 15 (2)(i)(ii) and (iii) of the standing order of the utility applicable to the petitioner.