Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri Dattusingh Rathod, was a Constable in the Border Security Force (BSF). He was dismissed from service by an order dated 22.06.2009 passed by the Commandant (third respondent) pursuant to disciplinary proceedings. His appeal against the dismissal was rejected by the Director General (second respondent) on 06.02.2017. The petitioner challenged both orders by way of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka. The core legal issue was whether the dismissal order was vitiated for non-supply of the inquiry report to the petitioner, which is a fundamental requirement of natural justice. The petitioner argued that the inquiry report was not furnished to him before the penalty was imposed, thereby denying him a fair opportunity to defend himself. The respondents contended that the proceedings were conducted in accordance with the rules. The court, after considering the submissions, found that the inquiry report was indeed not supplied to the petitioner, which constituted a serious violation of principles of natural justice. Relying on the settled legal position that non-supply of the inquiry report before imposing punishment renders the disciplinary proceedings illegal, the court quashed the dismissal order and the appellate order. The court directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits, including continuity of service and back wages, but granted liberty to the respondents to proceed afresh from the stage of supply of the inquiry report if they so desired.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Non-Supply of Inquiry Report - Violation of Natural Justice - The petitioner, a Constable in BSF, was dismissed from service without being furnished a copy of the inquiry report, which is a fundamental requirement of natural justice. The court held that failure to supply the inquiry report before imposing penalty renders the disciplinary proceedings and the consequential dismissal order illegal and unsustainable. (Paras 1-3) B) Constitutional Law - Articles 226 and 227 - Writ Jurisdiction - Quashing of Orders - The High Court, exercising its writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, quashed the dismissal order dated 22.06.2009 and the appellate order dated 06.02.2017, and directed reinstatement of the petitioner with all consequential benefits, including continuity of service and back wages, subject to the respondents' right to proceed afresh from the stage of supply of inquiry report. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of dismissal passed by the disciplinary authority and confirmed by the appellate authority is vitiated for non-supply of the inquiry report to the petitioner, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order of dismissal dated 22.06.2009 passed by the third respondent and the order dated 06.02.2017 passed by the second respondent are quashed. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits including continuity of service and back wages. However, the respondents are at liberty to proceed afresh from the stage of supply of the inquiry report, if they so desire.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- right to fair hearing
- non-supply of inquiry report
- disciplinary proceedings
- dismissal from service
- violation of principles of natural justice
