Patna High Court
Shankar Kumar Ghosh vs State Of Bihar And Ors. on 15 January, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999(1)BLJR542
JUDGMENT Ashish N. Trivedi, J.
1. The petitioner was initially appointed in the Bihar Police as Sub-Inspector in the year 1965 and was eventually posted as Junior Sub-Inspector of Police at G.R.P.S., Ranchi in November, 1979 and was then transferred to Jamshedpur on 24.7.1981 and thereafter to Dhanbad on 28.8.1981 and was posted as Officer-in-Charge. G.R.P.S. Dhanbad when a charge sheet dated 28.11.1981 (Annexure 4) was served on the petitioner alleging various misconducts said to have been committed by him. G.R.P. Case No. 51 of 1981 was also instituted against the petitioner under Sections 409. 379, 201. 202 & 120-B I.P.C. which was pending trial. After the conclusion of the disciplinary enquiry, the departmental proceeding was concluded and the Deputy Inspector General of Railway Police, Bihar by his order dated 18.9.1985 (Annexure '2') dismissed the petitioner from the service against which the petitioner preferred a statutory Appeal to the Director General of Police on 29.9.1985, a copy of the Memorandum of Appeal has been annexed as Annexure '3' to the Writ Petition. The Petitioner's Appeal was allowed by the Director General-cum-Inspector General of Police. Bihar by the order dated 5.1.1987 (Annexure '4') with the direction to the Petitioner to submit his show cause against the order of dismissal within one month which he did on 18.5.1987, a copy of the show cause submitted by the petitioner has been annexed as Annexure '6' to the Witt Petition. After considering the entire materials on record, the Director General-cum-inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna by his order contained in Memo No. 3506 dated 14.8.1987 awarded the punishment of dismissal from service against the petitioner.
2. Being aggrieved the petitioner preferred an Appeal to the Secretary to the Stale Government in the Home (Police) Department, a copy of the Memorandum of Appeal is annexed as Annexure '8' to the Writ Petition, but the Appeal remained pending for a considerable period and on account of inaction on the part of the Appellate Authority, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition in this Court which was registered as CWJC No. 4731 of 1989 and was disposed of by the order dated 12.9.1988 (Annexure '9') with the Direction to the Secretary to the Government in the Home (Police) Department to dispose of the Appeal of the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
3. By the order dated 13.12.1989 (Annexure '10') the Petitioner was informed that the State Government after consideration of the Appeal had rejected the same.
4. No Counter Affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondents nor have the Respondents to produced the appellate order said to have been passed by the Appellate Authority.
5. It further appears that the petitioner had not been communicated the order said to have been passed by the Appellate Authority but was only communicated by Annexure '10' that his Appeal had been rejected by the State Government, the Appellate Authority.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and have examined the materials on record.
7. An aggrieved Police Officer is entitled to prefer an Appeal which is his statutory right under Rule 851(a) of the Bihar Police Manual in cases of major punishment enumerated in Rule 828. Sub-rule (b) to Rule 851 of the Police Manual previous for an Appeal inter alia against an order of dismissal. Such an Appeal lies to the State Government, when the original order had been passed by the Inspector General of Police, that is to say, Inspector General-cum-Director General of Police, Bihar. Sub-rule (c) to Rule 851 of the Police Manual makes the order of the Appellate Authority final subject to the provisions of Rule 853. Rule 853 of the Police Manual further provides for submissions of Memorials and Revision.
8. It cannot be disputed that disciplinary proceedings are quasi-judicial proceedings and there is no reason as to why such proceedings be distinguished from other quasi-judicial proceedings requiring recording and communication of reasons and the conclusion arrived at in such proceedings. It also cannot be disputed that an Appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings and the Appellate Authority is entitled to agree or disagree with the reasons assigned by the Disciplinary Authority but if adequate and sufficient reasons have been recorded by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Order is final it may not be necessary for the Appellate Authority to record separate reasons for affirmance of the order yet the Appellate Order must indicate that the entire relevant material has been considered by the Appellate Authority so as to enable the delinquent employee to know as to what weighed with the Appellate Authority and also to know as to whether the entire material, that it to say, the record of the disciplinary proceedings was placed the Appellate Authority as also the Memorandum of Appeal preferred by the delinquent employee and the Appellate Authority had applied its mind to the relevant material. This is the bare minimum which would meet the principles of natural justice and action in fairness.
9. In the present case all what has been said above is wanting. What has been communicated by the District Order No. 1248/89 contained in Memo No. 1261/RO dated 13/20.12.1989 which was served on the Petitioner on 30.12.1989 is merely an intimation to the Petitioner that this Appeal had been rejected by the State Government after careful consideration. This communication does not even reveal whether the Appellate Authority i.e. State Government had applied its mind and examined the record of the disciplinary proceedings vis-a-vis the grounds taken by the Petitioner in his Memorandum of Appeal and it was satisfied that no case for interference in the punishment or otherwise had been made out by the petitioner. It is true that though while confirming an order passed by the Original Authority, the Appellate Authority need not record elaborate reasons yet the decision of the Appellate Authority must at least indicate that the entire record and the Representation/Appeal preferred by the aggrieved party had been considered and the Appellate Authority was satisfied that there was no good reason to interfere with the Original Authority. However, in the present case the Appellate Order attains finality subject to any decision on the Memorial and Representation preferred by the delinquent Police Officer to the higher Authority. It was, therefore, all the mere necessary for the Appellate Authority to have recorded the reasons and communicated the same to the petitioner so that in the event the petitioner is aggrieved he could have preferred the Memorial/Representation as envisaged in the Police Manual and would on the other hand enable this Court to decide whether the Appellate Authority had applied its mind to the materials on record which might have been placed before the Appellate Authority or not.
10. Having not done so the impugned communications dated 13/20.12.1989 suffer from the vice of non-application of mind and is also in violation of the principles of natural justice and fairness In action and cannot be sustained.
11. Learned Counsel for the petitioner stated at the Bar that the criminal case (G.R.P. Case No. 51 of 1981) which had been Instituted has concluded and the petitioner has been acquitted of all the charges.
12. Accordingly the Writ Petition is allowed and Annexure '10' dated 13/20.12.1989 is set aside and the Appellate Authority is directed to decide the petitioner's Appeal afresh but since it is an old matter and in view of the subsequent developments i.e. the acquittal of the petitioner in the criminal case, the petitioner is directed to submit afresh a true and correct legible copy of the Memorandum of Appeal preferred by him earlier to the Secretary to the Government, Home (Police) Department within One month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and shall also annex the certified copy of the judgment along with the Memorandum of Appeal and it shall be open for the Petitioner to make a further representation to the Appellate Authority to be submitted within the period aforesaid along with the Memorandum of Appeal indicating that he has been acquitted in the criminal case and the petitioner shall also annex a certified copy of the Judgment of the Court acquitting him of the criminal charges. The Secretary to the Government, Home (Police) Department shall decide the Appeal by a reasoned order and shall communicate and serve upon the petitioner the order which may be passed by the Appellate Authority within two months of the date of receipt of the documents directed to be presented by the petitioner to the Appellate Authority. No order as to costs.