Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Shivprasad S. Naik, was appointed as Block Development Officer on 07.07.2004 on the recommendations of the Goa Public Service Commission. On 10.09.2008, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him under Rule 18 of the CCS Appeal Rules, 1965, and a memorandum was issued proposing an inquiry under Rule 14 of the same rules. Four charges were framed relating to shifting of alignment of work and recording in measurement books. The petitioner submitted his reply contending that he had followed applicable circulars and had authority to permit such shifting. An inquiry officer was appointed who submitted a report holding the charges proved. The disciplinary authority, without furnishing a copy of the inquiry report to the petitioner, passed an order on 06.10.2015 dismissing him from service. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Goa. The main legal issue was whether the dismissal order was vitiated for non-supply of the inquiry report. The petitioner argued that the failure to supply the inquiry report before imposing penalty violated principles of natural justice and Article 311(2) of the Constitution. The respondents contended that the inquiry report was not required to be supplied as per the rules. The court held that the law is well settled that a copy of the inquiry report must be furnished to the delinquent officer before the disciplinary authority takes a decision, and failure to do so vitiates the order. The court set aside the dismissal order and directed reinstatement with continuity of service but limited back wages to 50% in view of the petitioner's contributory negligence and the fact that the inquiry itself was not quashed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Supply of Inquiry Report - Natural Justice - The disciplinary authority imposed penalty of dismissal without furnishing copy of inquiry report to the delinquent officer - Held that non-supply of inquiry report before imposing penalty is a violation of principles of natural justice and vitiates the dismissal order (Paras 5-7). B) Service Law - Dismissal - Reinstatement - Back Wages - The court set aside the dismissal order and directed reinstatement with continuity of service but limited back wages to 50% considering the petitioner's contributory negligence and the fact that the inquiry was not quashed (Paras 8-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of dismissal from service passed against the petitioner is vitiated for non-supply of the inquiry report to the petitioner before imposing the penalty.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, set aside the dismissal order dated 06.10.2015, and directed reinstatement of the petitioner with continuity of service but limited back wages to 50% of the salary from the date of dismissal till reinstatement, payable within three months.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Inquiry report must be furnished to delinquent before imposing penalty
- Violation of Article 311(2) of Constitution
- CCS (CCA) Rules
- 1965 Rule 14
- CCS Appeal Rules
- 1965 Rule 18
