IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP No. 32376 of 1999(D)
1. C.BALAKRISHNAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.B.RAGUNATHAN
For Respondent :SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON,SC,TVM CORPN.
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :07/03/2007
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
--------------------------
O.P.NO. 32376 OF 1999
-------------------------
DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF MARCH, 2007
JUDGMENT
The petitioner while working as Revenue Inspector of Thiruvalla
Municipality was proceeded against in disciplinary proceedings by
issuing Ext.P1 memo of charges dated, 9.8.94. Since the explanation
furnished by the petitioner was not satisfactory to the disciplinary
authority, an enquiry was conducted, in which the petitioner was found
guilty of causing loss to the Municipality. Therefore Ext.P3 show cause
notice was issued directing him to show cause why the said loss should
not be recovered from him as punishment for the misconduct alleged
to have been proved against him. Despite Ext.P4 objection filed by the
petitioner by Ext.P5 order the proposed to punishment was confirmed
and the punishment of recovery of the loss caused to the Municipality
on account of the action of the petitioner was directed to be recovered
from him. His Ext.P6 appeal was also rejected by Ext.P7 order. In the
meanwhile, he retired from service on 28.2.98. Thereafter, Ext.P8
order was passed directing recovery of part of the said amount from
his DCRG and he was also directed to convey his concurrence for
recovery of the balance amount from the commuted value of pension
O.P.32376/99 2
due to him. The petitioner is challenging Exts.P5, P7 and P8 orders
in this original petition.
2. He had raised several contentions against the impugned
orders. I am not considering all the contentions, since I am
impressed by one contention which relates to violation of principles
of natural justice on which ground alone the matter has to be
remitted to the original authority for fresh decision. The contention
is that before passing Ext.P5 order, the petitioner was not furnished
with the copy of the enquiry report. According to the petitioner it is
settled law that non furnishing of copy of the enquiry report before
imposition of punishment would amount the violation of principles of
natural justice. Although such a specific ground has been taken in
the original petition itself, the counter affidavit silent about that
contention. That would show that the contention of the petitioner
in this regard is justified. That being so, the entire proceedings
subsequent to the submission of the enquiry report by the enquiry
officer, are violative of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly,
Exts.P5,P7 and P8 orders are quashed and the matter is remanded
to the 2nd respondent for fresh consideration of the matter from the
stage of issuing fresh show cause notice on the basis of the enquiry
report after furnishing a copy of the enquiry report to the petitioner.
It is ordered accordingly.
3. The petitioner has got a contention that the proceedings
O.P.32376/99 3
for recovery from him is violative of Rule 3 of Part III of Kerala
Service Rules. I am not inclined to go into this question at this
point of time, since the matter is being remanded to the original
authority. As and when further steps are taken pursuant to this
judgment it would be open to the petitioner to raise all contentions
available to him.
Original petition is disposed of as above.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
Acd
O.P.32376/99 4