Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Sheopurari Singh, was employed as Deputy General Manager (Vigilance) in M-1 Grade at the Vigilance Department of Western Coalfields Ltd., a subsidiary of Coal India Limited. He was removed from service by a communication dated 8-9th August, 2007 issued by respondent no.1 (Coal India Limited). The removal was based on an alleged self-declaration made by the petitioner under Rule 34(1)(ii) of the Coal India Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978, without holding any departmental inquiry. The petitioner appealed to the Board of Directors of respondent no.1, which rejected his appeal by order dated 24th November, 2007, communicated on 14th December, 2007. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, seeking quashing of the removal order, the appellate order, and the communication. The petitioner argued that the removal was illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice as no inquiry was conducted and no opportunity of hearing was given. The respondents contended that the removal was justified based on the petitioner's own self-declaration. The court, after hearing arguments, found that the removal was indeed without any inquiry and in violation of natural justice. The court held that Rule 34(1)(ii) of the Rules does not dispense with the requirement of an inquiry before imposing the penalty of removal. The court quashed and set aside the impugned orders and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits, including continuity of service and back wages, subject to any further proceedings that may be initiated in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Removal from Service - Natural Justice - Rule 34(1)(ii) of Coal India Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978 - The petitioner was removed from service without any inquiry, solely on the basis of an alleged self-declaration. The court held that the removal was in violation of principles of natural justice as no inquiry was conducted and no opportunity of hearing was given. The impugned orders were quashed and set aside. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the removal of the petitioner from service without holding any inquiry and solely on the basis of an alleged self-declaration under Rule 34(1)(ii) of the Coal India Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978 is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed and set aside the impugned orders (removal order dated 8-9th August 2007, appellate order dated 24th November 2007, and communication dated 14th December 2007), and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits, including continuity of service and back wages, subject to any further proceedings that may be initiated in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Inquiry mandatory before removal
- Rule 34(1)(ii) Coal India Executives Conduct Discipline and Appeal Rules 1978
- No inquiry without opportunity
- Self-declaration not sufficient for dismissal
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (03) 146
Writ Petition No.4475 of 2007
Mr. Mohan Sudame for Petitioner, Mr. Samarditya Pal, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.C. Mehadia for Respondents
Coal India Limited, Western Coalfields Ltd., Shri B. N. Mishra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging removal from service and appellate order.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of removal order dated 8-9th August 2007, appellate order dated 24th November 2007, and communication dated 14th December 2007; reinstatement with consequential benefits.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was removed from service without any inquiry, solely on the basis of an alleged self-declaration under Rule 34(1)(ii) of the Coal India Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978.
Previous Decisions
Appeal to Board of Directors of respondent no.1 was rejected on 24th November 2007.
Issues
Whether removal from service without holding any inquiry and solely on the basis of an alleged self-declaration under Rule 34(1)(ii) of the Coal India Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978 is sustainable in law.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that removal was illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice as no inquiry was conducted and no opportunity of hearing was given.
Respondents contended that removal was justified based on the petitioner's own self-declaration.
Ratio Decidendi
Removal from service without holding any inquiry and solely on the basis of an alleged self-declaration under Rule 34(1)(ii) of the Coal India Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978 is in violation of principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained.
Judgment Excerpts
By present petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside: i) communication dated 8-9th August, 2007 issued by respondent no.1 removing him from service as Deputy General Manager (Vigilance) in M-1 Grade at Vigilance Department of respondent no.2 and ii) order dated 24th November, 2007 passed by appellate authority (Board of Directors of respondent no.1) rejecting appeal preferred by the petitioner against his such a removal from service and so also iii) communication dated 14th December, 2007 intimating same to petitioner, iv) granting any other reliefs deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.
The learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to the factual aspects of the matter urged that : a) without holding any inquiry and on the basis of alleged self declaration of the petitioner under the provisions of Rule 34 (1) (ii) of Coal India Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978, respondents charging the petitioner of impersonation, manipulation of CMPF record for fraudulently getting induced into service in place of one
Procedural History
Petitioner was removed from service by communication dated 8-9th August 2007. He appealed to the Board of Directors of respondent no.1, which rejected the appeal by order dated 24th November 2007, communicated on 14th December 2007. Petitioner then filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
- Coal India Executives Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978: Rule 34(1)(ii)
