Bombay High Court
Laxman B. Panmand vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India Ltd. ... on 15 October, 2020
Author: N.R. Borkar
Bench: K.K.Tated, N.R. Borkar
Rkm 1 (10)WP-9445-19
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally
signed by
Rajshree More
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Rajshree Date:
More 2020.10.16
15:39:02
+0530
WRIT PETITION NO.9445 OF 2019
Laxman B. Panmand ] ... Petitioner
V/s.
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd.& Ors.] ... Respondents
Mr.Ramesh Ramamurthy with Saikumar Ramamurthy, for Petitioner.
Mr.Arsh Misr i/b M.V.Kini & Co. for Respondents.
CORAM : K.K.TATED, &
N.R. BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : 15 OCTOBER, 2020.
(Through Video Conferencing)
P.C. :
1] Heard learned counsel for parties.
2] By this Petition under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, Petitioner is challenging the order dated 2
February , 2018 of the Disciplinary Authority, order dated 25 June, 2018 of the Appellate Authority and order dated 7 May, 2019 of the Reviewing Authority, by which the respondents imposed major penalty on Petitioner.
3] The main contention of the Petitioner is that, respondents without conducting regular departmental enquiry, imposed the major penalty.
Rkm 2 (10)WP-9445-19 4] On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents
submits that they followed due process of law. Not only that, they complied the rules of NPCIL (Conduct) Rules, 1994. Mainly he relies on Rule 12.2 and Explanation (Page 192 of the Petition) which reads thus :
12.2 Whenever the Disciplinary Authority is of the opinion that there are grounds for inquiring into the truth of any imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour against an employee, it may itself inquire into, or appoint any serving officer of the Company (hereinafter called the inquiring Authority) to inquire into the truth thereof.
Provided that where there is a complaint of Sexual Harassment within the meaning of Rule 9 of the NPCIL (Conduct) Rules, 1994 the same shall be dealt in accordance with the provisions under The Sexual Harassment of Woman at work place (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and rules thereunder.
Where the Disciplinary Authority itself holds the inquiry any reference in sub-rule (7) to sub-rule (19) to the Inquiring Authority shall be construed as a reference to the Disciplinary Authority.
5] Learned counsel for the Respondents submits that in view of Explanation to Rule 12.2, there is no question of issuing charge sheet and or holding a separate enquiry.
6] Considering the submission made by both the learned counsel, we are satisfied that the Petitioner has made out a case for admission. Hence, following order is passed :
Rkm 3 (10)WP-9445-19
a] Admit.
b] Hearing is expedited.
c] If matter is not shown on board for final hearing by the end of June, 2021, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to approach this Court for fixing date of hearing.
d] This order will be digitally signed by the Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on a digitally signed copy of this order.
[N.R.BORKAR, J] [K.K.TATED, J]