Masood Ahmad Khan Vs State of Up and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Masood Ahmad Khan Vs State of Up and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned termination order dated 19.01.2024 and appellate order dated 10.12.2024 set aside; matter remitted to the respondents for a fresh enquiry commencing from the charge-sheet, with directions to serve adverse documents and the list of departmental witnesses, fix and notify enquiry dates, appoint a presenting officer, produce departmental witnesses for cross-examination, consider the petitioner's defence, and complete the process within four months of receipt of a certified copy; petitioner directed to cooperate, failing which the Enquiry Officer may record a finding and proceed; petitioner to be reinstated with liberty to the respondents to suspend him during the enquiry, and entitled to subsistence allowance during the enquiry.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of termination is vitiated because the petitioner was not given an opportunity to examine departmental witnesses and no departmental witness was produced before the Enquiry Officer. +1 more

Court's answer

Oral evidence was essential to bring home the charges in the departmental proceedings; even if the petitioner does not appear in the enquiry, the department is bound to produce its evidence and witnesses before the Enquiry Officer and prove the case against him.

Ratio / Principle

Since no departmental witnesses were examined before the Enquiry Officer, the enquiry proceedings stand vitiated.

Key takeaways

The disciplinary authority illegally relied upon the vitiated enquiry proceedings while passing the termination order, and the appellate authority failed to redeem those illegalities by affirming the dismissal and rejecting the appeal.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Departmental enquiry - non-examination of departmental witnesses - enquiry vitiated. The Allahabad High Court (Ajay Bhanot, J.) held that where oral evidence was essential to prove the charges, the department remains under a bounden obligation to produce its evidence and witnesses before the Enquiry Officer even if the delinquent employee does not appear, and in their absence the enquiry proceedings stand vitiated. The termination order dated 19.01.2024 of the Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Nahtore, District Bijnor, and the appellate order dated 10.12.2024 of the Commissioner, Moradabad Division, were set aside. The matter was remitted for a fresh enquiry from the stage of the charge-sheet, to be completed within four months, with directions for service of documents and witness list, fixation of dates, appointment of a presenting officer, production and cross-examination of departmental witnesses, and consideration of the defence. The petitioner was to be reinstated, with liberty to the respondents to suspend him during the enquiry, and was held entitled to subsistence allowance during the enquiry.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24450

Court No. - 5

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1558 of 2025

Petitioner :- Masood Ahmad Khan Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

Heard Shri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel assisted by Shri Aditendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents No. 1 & 2 and Shri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the respondents No. 3 and 4.

The petitioner has assailed the order of termination dated 19.01.2024 passed by the Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Nahtore, District Bijnor and the order dated 10.12.2024 passed by the appellate authorityCommissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad rejecting the appeal of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the dismissal order was passed without adopting a procedure not known to law while dispensing with the services of the petitioner. The appellate authority erred in law by upholding the said order. The petitioner was not given an opportunity to examine any departmental witnesses. In fact no departmental witness was produced before the Enquiry Officer.

Shri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the respondents No. 3 and 4 on the basis of instructions submits that no oral evidence on behalf of the department was recorded in the enquiry proceedings.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In the facts of this case, the oral evidence was essential to bring home the charges against the petitioner as per the applicable standards of evidence in the departmental proceedings. Admittedly no departmental witnesses were examined before the Enquiry Officer. Even if the petitioner does not appear in the enquiry proceedings, the department is under a bounden obligation to produce the relevant evidences and witnesses before the Enquiry Officer and prove the case against the petitioner. In the absence thereof, the enquiry proceedings are vitiated. The order passed by the disciplinary authority while passing the impugned order of termination illegally relied upon the aforesaid vitiated enquiry proceedings. The appellate authority failed to redeem the illegalities by affirming the order of dismissal and rejecting the appeal of the petitioner.

In this wake, the impugned order dated 19.01.2024 passed by the Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Nahtaur, District Bijnor as well as the impugned order dated 10.12.2024 passed by the Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad are liable to be set aside and are set

aside.

The matter is remitted to the respondents with the following directions:-

i) Enquiry to commence from the chargesheet.All documents which are adverse to the petitioner and are proposed to be relied upon against him and list of departmental witnesses shall be served upon the petitioner.

ii) The Enquiry Officer shall set specific dates for the enquiry proceedings and inform the petitioner in advance about the same.

iii) The department shall appoint a presenting officer who shall introduce the evidences proposed to be relied against the petitioner.

iv) The departmental witnesses shall be produced in the enquiry proceedings to bring home the charges against the petitioner.

v) The petitioner shall be given an opportunity to cross examine the said witnesses.

vi) The Enquiry Officer shall submit a report after considering the defence of the petitioner.

vii) The petitioner is directed to cooperate in the enquiry proceedings.

viii) The procedure shall be completed within a period of

four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

In case the petitioner does not cooperate in the enquiry proceedings, the Enquiry Officer shall record a finding to that effect and proceed attempt with the matter as stated above.

During the pendency of the enquiry proceedings, it shall be open to the respondents to suspend the petitioner after reinstating him in compliance of this order. During the course of enquiry proceedings the petitioner shall be entitled to subsistence allowance.

Writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.

Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Jaswant

Digitally signed by :- JASWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad