Orissa High Court
Gupta Chandra Bidika vs Union Of India And Others ..... Opposite ... on 29 September, 2023
Bench: B.R. Sarangi, Murahari Sri Raman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 12232 of 2023
Gupta Chandra Bidika ..... Petitioner
Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate
Vs.
Union of India and others ..... Opposite Parties
Mr. B.K. Pardhi, Advocate (O.Ps. 1 and 2) &
Mr. B.N. T4ripathy, Advocate (O.P.3)
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
ORDER
29.09.2023 Order No. I.A. No. 5666 of 2023
04. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. This application has been filed for stay of the disciplinary proceeding initiated under Annexure-2.
3. Mr. S.K. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that against refusal for grant of interim relief, the petitioner has approached this Court. He further contended that the Tribunal rejected the interim relief on the ground that the allegation leveled against the petitioner involves complicated questions of fact and law for which the departmental proceedings is to be stayed, does not sound to judicial conscience. In support of the same, he relied on the decision of the apex Court in the case of M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and others, AIR 1999 SC 1416 : 1999 (2) CTC 579, more particularly to paragraph 22 (iii) wherein it has been observed as follows:
"Whether the nature of a charge in a criminal case is grave and whether complicated questions of fact and law are involved in Page 1 of 3 that case, will depend upon the nature of offence, the nature of the case launched against the employees on the basis of evidence and material collected against him during investigation or as reflected in the charge sheet.
4. He further contended that without considering the same in proper perspective the Tribunal rejected the prayer of the petitioner. As a result of which, the opposite parties are proceeding in the matter and the date has been fixed to 05.10.2023. In the event the opposite parties will proceed in the matter and decide the same, then this matter will become infructuous.
5. Mr. B.N. Tripathy, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.3 stated that they have filed the objection to the I.A. application.
6. But fact remains, unless the interim order is passed and the petitioner is protected, this matter will become infructuous, in the event any decision is taken by the opposite parties.
7. In view of such position, as an interim measure, this court directs that the further proceeding in departmental proceeding under Annexure-2 shall remain stayed till 01.11.2023.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE (M.S. RAMAN) JUDGE 05. W.P.(C) No. 12232 of 2023
8. Mr. B.K. Pardhi, learned Central Government Counsel appearing for opposite parties 1 and 2 and Mr. B.N. Tripathy, learned Page 2 of 3 counsel appearing for opposite party no.3 seeks some time to file counter affidavit.
9. Call this matter after two weeks.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
Arun (M.S. RAMAN)
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: ARUN KUMAR MISHRA
Designation: ADR-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 29-Sep-2023 15:52:36 Page 3 of 3