Pankaj Roy vs State of Meghalaya and Others

S.L. Saraf, J.—This is a writ petition against the dismissal order dated 22nd December, 1994 Annexure - 5, The order was passed by the Chairman Meghalaya State Electricity Board on the basis of disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Petitioner, wherein an enquiry officer was appointed, who completed the enquiry on 9th and 20th September, 1994 but, admittedly, no copy of the enquiry report was ever served on the Petitioner. The Supreme Court in Judgment reported in AIR 199 S.C 471 at page 477 in paragraph 18 hold:

wherever there has been an Inquiry Officer, and he has furnished a report to the disciplinary authority at the conclusion of the inquiry holding the delinquent guilty of all or any of the charges with proposal for any particular punishment or not, the delinquent is entitled to make a representation against it, if he so desires, and non-furnishing of the report would amount to violation of rules of natural justice find make the final order liable to challenge hereafter.

In view of the aforesaid Judgment of the Supreme Court, I hold that no effect be given to the order of dismissal. However, the Respondent shall be entitled to keep the Petitioner under suspension as long as the appeal to be filed by the Petitioner is not heard and disposed of. The Petitioner shall be entitled to file an appeal before the Board under Rule 10 of Meghalaya State Electricity Board Rules 1975. If, however, there is no procedure prescribed for filing of the appeal under Rule 10, the Board is directed to lay down a procedure for filing of the appeal within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, serve a copy of the said procedure on the Petitioner. The Respondents are further directed to serve a copy of the enquiry report alongwith all the annexures and documents which they are relying upon for the so-called dismissal order so that the Petitioner can file an appeal before the appropriate authority as per the rules and the procedure that may be prescribed in, the meanwhile. The rules so framed must provide sufficient time to file the appeal from the date of serving of the Inquiry report on the Petitioner.

The Chairman of the Board should not be a part of the appellate authority to hear the matter in the instant case. The appellate authority, after getting the appeal filed by the Petitioner, should expeditiously dispose of the same and pass its final order. The older should be a speaking order, Alter the filial order is made by the appellate authority the Petitioner will be at liberty to move a fresh write application, if he so desires.