Remanded

Satya Ranjan Mahanta v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC24 Sept 2024WP(C)/23392/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging dismissal from service due to producing a fake training certificate, the High Court of Orissa set aside the impugned punishment order. The court found a major lacuna for failing to serve the required notice to represent before concluding proceedings. The matter was remitted to the disciplinary authority to proceed from the stage of issuing the initial representation

What did the court decide?

Impugned punishment order set aside; matter remitted to disciplinary authority to proceed from the stage of issuance of notice to represent within two months.

Satya Ranjan Mahanta Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

Signature Not Verified

¶2

Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cutt ack Date: 25-Sep-2024 17:58:41

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶4

W.P.(C) No.23392 of 2019

¶5

Satya Ranjan Mahanta …. Petitioner Mr.Bimbisar Dash, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

…. Opposite Parties

¶9

Mr.S.K.Jena, AGA

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY

ORDER 24.09.2024

Order No.

The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

Heard Mr.Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.Jena, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties.

¶16

The allegation made against the Petitioner is that while serving as Assistant Teacher, he produced fake certificate of training to get appointment as such. Accordingly, disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him and by virtue of the impugned order dated 25^th November 2019 under Annexure-14, the Petitioner has been dismissed from service.

¶17

Signature Not Verified4. Mr.Dash submits on behalf of the Petitioner that, he was not Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWALgranted due opportunity to submit his reply before the enquiry officer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cutt ack Date: 25-Sep-2024 17:58:41and sec ondly, the punishment imposed on him is bad for the reason

¶18

that no opportunity of giving representation is granted to him on the proposed punishment.

¶19

Mr.Jena, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that keeping in view the gravity of charges that the Petitioner submitted fake certificate of training (C.T. Certificate) to get appointment, his initial appointment to the post is void and thus, strict compliance of procedure to impose punishment is not attracted. However, the Petitioner was served with charges and he did not submit his reply in due time and inquiry report was also served on the Petitioner duly to submit his reply which the Petitioner also failed.

¶20

As seen from the facts of the case, it remains admitted that after inquiry was over, only notice to represent has been granted to the Petitioner under Annexure-12 vide letter dated 2^nd November 2019 of the disciplinary authority. Service of no further notice in terms of Rule 15 (10)(i)(b) of the O.C.S (C.C.A) Rules, 1962 has been served on the Petitioner to reply against the proposed punishment. This is a major lacuna found on the part of the disciplinary authority in concluding the proceeding by imposing punishment. As such, the impugned punishment under Annexure-14 being set aside for the time being, the matter is remitted back to the disciplinary authority to proceed from the stage of Rule 15 (10)(i)(a) of the O.C.S (C.C.A) Rules, 1962 i.e. from the stage of issuance of Annexure-12. It is further directed that the disciplinary authority shall conclude the proceeding within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

Signature Not Verified7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWALdisposed of. Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cutt ack Date: 25-Sep-2024 17:58:418. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶23

( B.P. Routray)

¶24

Judge

¶25

C.R.Biswal

¶26

Page 3 of 3

Satya Ranjan Mahanta v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Ranjan Mahanta v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Hota Vs State of Odisha

Kshitish Kumar Patra Vs State of Odisha

Anupam Udiptam Kumar Jena Vs State of Odisha

Gadadhar Swain Vs State of Odisha

Pramila Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Nabakishore Nanda Vs State of Odisha