IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) WP(C) No. 2145/1999

Transcription

1 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) WP(C) No. 2145/1999 Shri Wahed Ali, Son of Late Mafizuddin Ahmed, Resident of Dhirenpara, P.S. Fatasil Ambari, Guwahati-25, District Kamrup, Assam -Vs-.Petitioner 1. The Hon ble Gauhati High Court, Guwahati-1, represented by the Registrar General (Previously known as Registrar (Judicial), Gauhati High Court, Guwahati The State of Assam, represented by the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Judicial Department, Dispur, Guwahati The Registrar (Administration), Gauhati High Court, Guwahati. 4. The Registrar (Inspection and Enquiry) of the Gauhati High Court, Guwahati-1. Respondents. WP(C) No. 1622/2000 Shri Wahed Ali, Son of Late Mafizuddin Ahmed, Resident of Dhirenpara, P.S. Fatasil Ambari, Guwahati-25, District Kamrup, Assam -Vs-.Petitioner 1. The Hon ble Gauhati High Court, Guwahati-1, represented by the Registrar General (Previously known as Registrar (Judicial), Gauhati High Court, Guwahati-1. WP(C) 2145/99 & 1622/ oral Page 1 of 7

2 2. The State of Assam, represented by the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Judicial Department, Dispur, Guwahati The Registrar (Inspection and Enquiry) of the Gauhati High Court, Guwahati The Deputy Registrar (Accounts), Gauhati High Court, Gwuahati The Registrar (Administration), Gauhati High Court, Guwahati BEFORE Respondents. THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA For the Petitioner : For the Respondents : Shri B. Sinha, Adv. Shri U.K. Nair, SC, GHC. Shri A. Chetri, Adv. Date of hearing and judgement : 21/05/2013. JUDGEMAND AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. B. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U.K. Nair along with Mr. A. Chetri, learned counsel representing the Gauhati High Court. 2. The petitioner, an ex-employee (Record Arranger) of this Court, filed the writ petitions claiming subsistence allowance for the period of suspension (10/12/1993 to 02/04/1996) and to set aside and quash the order dated 02/04/1996 by which he was dismissed from service pursuant to a departmental proceeding. While in WP(C) No. 2145/199, the petitioner has put to challenge the order of dismissal, in WP(C) No. 1622/2000 he has prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay subsistence allowance for the period from 10/12/1993 to 02/04/1996 during which he was placed under suspension pending drawal of the departmental proceeding and also in view of his involvement in the related criminal case. WP(C) 2145/99 & 1622/ oral Page 2 of 7

3 3. Mr. B. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when it is an admitted position that the petitioner was placed under suspension in view of his involvement in a criminal proceeding and also pending drawal of departmental proceeding, he was entitled to receive subsistence allowance. He further submits that as there was gross violation of the principles of natural justice in conducting the departmental enquiry against the petitioner as he was not provided with adequate opportunity of being heard, the impugned order of dismissal is not sustainable in law. 4. Mr. U.K. Nair, learned Standing Counsel representing the Gauhati High Court countering the above argument, submits that as the facts well speak for itself, the petitioner was found to be involved in defalcation of huge Govt. money, as a consequence of which he was arrested by the Police and presently criminal proceedings are pending against him. He further submits that departmental proceedings was also initiated against the petitioner in which it was clearly established that he was guilty of the charges levelled against him and considering the gravity of the misconduct, the disciplinary authority thought it prudent to impose the penalty of dismissal from service. He also submits that the petitioner was provided with all reasonable opportunities of being heard and thus the allegation of violation of the principles of natural justice is absurd and untenable. 5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the materials on record. The petitioner while was serving as Record Arranger of this Court was placed under suspension by order dated 10/12/1993 pending drawal of departmental proceeding. He was found involved in defalcation of huge amount of Govt. money and accordingly criminal proceedings was also initiated against him. In the departmental proceeding, the following charges were levelled against him vide Charge Sheet dated 7/121/1994. WP(C) 2145/99 & 1622/ oral Page 3 of 7

4 1. That you have been working as Record arranger attached to the Accounts Section of the principal Seat of Gauhati High Court at Guwahati since till (Date of your suspension from service). During the period from to , you were entrusted with 214 (two hundred fourteen) T.A. Bills, Medical Bills etc amounting to Rs.10,90,683/- (Rupees Ten lakhs ninety thousand Six hundred eighty three) only for encashment from the Treasury. While encashing the aforesaid bills you had inflated the amount of money in each of the aforesaid 214 (two hundred and fourteen) bills by inserting, overwriting and erasing the figures and letters in each of the aforesaid 214 bills and thereby drawn total excess amount of money to the tune of Rs.21,43,526/-(Rupees hundred and twenty six) only which is more than the total specified amount of money namely Rs.10,90,683/- (Rupees ten lakhs ninety thousand six hundred eighty three) only in the aforesaid 214 bills. Thus, you had caused wrongful loss to the Public Exchequer to the tune of Rs.21,43,526/- (Rupees twenty one lakhs forty three thousand five hundred and twenty six) only. You have thus failed to maintain absolute integrity and honesty in discharging your official duties as Record Arranger and in fact, you had committed forgery by inserting, overwriting and erasing the figures and letters in each of the 214 bills dishonestly, fraudulently and without any lawful authority with intent to cause wrongful loss of such a huge amount to the public Exchequer and to make a wrong-ful gain to yourself by using the aforesaid forged 214 bills. 2. That you in the capacity of being Record Arranger attached to Accounts Section of the Principal Seat of Gauhati High Court at Guwahati and having been entrusted with the duty and responsibility of encashing 214 bills (T.A.Bills, Medical Bills etc) amounting to Rs.10,90,683/- (Rupees ten lakhs ninety thousand six hundred eighty three) only from the Treasury and to deposit the amount mentioned in the aforesaid bills to the Cashier of the Accounts Section of the Principal Seat of Gauhati High Court at Guwahati and while discharging your aforesaid duty, you committed forgery in respect of the aforesaid WP(C) 2145/99 & 1622/ oral Page 4 of 7

5 214 bills and thereby drew excess amount of money to the tune of Rs.21,43,526.00(Rupees hundred and twenty six) only and defaulcated the aforesaid amount for your personal gain. Thus you have dishonestly and fraudulently misappropriated Rs.21,43,526/-(Rupees hundred twenty six) only by committing forgery and by abusing your position of record Arranger. 3. That you have acquired properties both movable and immovable either in your name or in the name of members of your family amounting to not less than Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees twenty lakhs) only, without prior information and permission from the Registry in violation of Rule 52 of the Gauhati High Court Services etc. Rules, That you by your aforesaid illegal, fraudulent and dishonest acts have not only submitted forgery and misappropriated public money to the tune of Rs.21,43,526/- (Rupees hundred and twenty six) only but also failed to maintain absolute integrity, honesty and devotion to duty as expected of a responsible employee of Gauhati High Court. 5. That you absented yourself from attending the office of the High Court from till date without permission from the competent authority. You were arrested by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department for ACB PS Case NO.18/94 under section 409 I.P.C. and were in police custody. You did not report the fact to the High Court authority and thus, you have violated Rule 59 of the High Court Rules, You are, therefore, charged with violation of Rule 59 of the said Rules. 6. The petitioner was directed to submit written statement and he was also provided with the opportunity to inspect the documents. Along with the charge sheet he was also served with the copies of the statement of allegations, documents, names of witnesses, etc. It is an admitted position that inspite of receipt of the charge sheet, the petitioner did not submit any written statement of defence. As recorded in the enquiry report dated 02/04/1996, the petitioner was WP(C) 2145/99 & 1622/ oral Page 5 of 7

6 given enumerable chances to defend his case in the enquiry proceeding but he did not avail the same. As recorded in the said order, the Disciplinary Authority examined 8(eight) witnesses and exhibited number of documents. On conclusion of the enquiry proceeding, it was found that the charges levelled against the petitioner stood established in the enquiry. The enquiry report is dated On the basis of the enquiry report and the materials available on record and also the reply submitted by the petitioner, the disciplinary authority passed the impugned order dated 02/04/1996 imposing the penalty of dismissal from service on the petitioner. In the detailed order, the Disciplinary Authority discussed the pros-andcons of the entire matter in reference to the evidence on record and also the opportunity granted to the petitioner to defend his case. 8. Above being the position, it cannot be said to be a case of denial of opportunity to the petitioner to defend his case. On perusal of the writ petition, what is found is that there is only a vague and indefinite statement without disclosing any material particulars that there was violation of the principles of natural justice in conducting the enquiry. However, not to speak of pleading any prejudice caused to the petitioner, there is also no whisper and / or disclosure of any materials which prejudicially affected the defence of the petitioner. 9. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the writ petition being WP(C) No. 2145/1999 and accordingly the same stands dismissed. 10. As regard the prayer made in the WP(C) No. 1622/2000 for payment of subsistence allowance of the period in question, it is seen that he was directed to submit documents regarding non-employment as it was revealed that he was engaged in some kind of business. Although, the petitioner had submitted application to the effect that he was not employed during the said period but the authority when asked to substantiate the said plea, he declined to respond to the WP(C) 2145/99 & 1622/ oral Page 6 of 7

7 same. This being the position, the prayer for payment of subsistence allowance cannot be granted unless the petitioner meets with the requirements as was asked for from him. 11. Both the writ petitions are disposed of in the above manner. There shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE Sukhamay WP(C) 2145/99 & 1622/ oral Page 7 of 7