Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Abdul Rauf Mohammed Khaja, was employed as a Peon (Watchman) in the Collector Office, Nanded. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him vide charge sheet dated 02.02.2005 on the ground that he turned hostile during the trial in Sessions Case No. 10 of 2004 against another peon, Shri Sayed Alim, which led to the accused's acquittal. Based on the findings of the Sessions Judge, the petitioner was charged with misconduct. The disciplinary authority imposed a penalty of reduction to the minimum pay scale by order dated 15.12.2008. The appellate authority, by order dated 23.09.2010, modified the penalty to reduction to the minimum of the pay scale permanently. The revision petition was rejected on 03.03.2015. The petitioner challenged these orders before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed the original application by judgment dated 16.08.2017. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition. The High Court observed that the Tribunal erroneously noted that the petitioner was challenging dismissal from service, whereas the penalty was reduction to minimum pay scale. The court held that a witness is not bound to adhere to his previous statement and cannot be penalized for turning hostile, as it does not constitute misconduct under service rules. The court also noted that the appellate authority enhanced the penalty without providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the High Court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned orders of the Tribunal, disciplinary authority, appellate authority, and revision authority, and directed that the petitioner's pay scale be restored to what it would have been but for the penalty.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Misconduct - Witness Turning Hostile - A government employee working as a Peon was charged with misconduct for turning hostile during a criminal trial against another employee, leading to the accused's acquittal. The disciplinary authority imposed penalty of reduction to minimum pay scale, later modified to permanent reduction by appellate authority. The Bombay High Court held that a witness is not bound to adhere to his previous statement and cannot be penalized for turning hostile, as it does not constitute misconduct under service rules. The court set aside the penalty and directed reinstatement of the petitioner's pay scale. (Paras 2-10) B) Service Law - Penalty - Proportionality - Reduction to Minimum Pay Scale Permanently - The appellate authority modified the penalty to reduction to minimum of pay scale permanently without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The High Court held that such enhancement without hearing is violative of principles of natural justice. (Paras 3, 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a government employee can be subjected to disciplinary proceedings and penalized for turning hostile as a witness in a criminal trial, resulting in acquittal of the accused.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the judgment and order of the Tribunal dated 16.08.2017, and also set aside the orders of the disciplinary authority dated 15.12.2008, appellate authority dated 23.09.2010, and revision authority dated 03.03.2015. The court directed that the petitioner's pay scale be restored to what it would have been but for the penalty.
Law Points
- Disciplinary proceedings cannot be based on a witness turning hostile in a criminal trial
- as witnesses are not bound to adhere to previous statements
- Hostility in court does not constitute misconduct under service rules
- Penalty of reduction to minimum pay scale permanently set aside
