2024 (7) TMI 1 - HC - Indian Laws

Proceedings against retired Sales Tax Officer post superannuation - GST default by the company in which he was appointed post retirement - Dismissal of writ petition as premature - Single Judge has proceeded to non-suit the relief - no opportunity given for preliminary enquiry - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - It is not in dispute that the appellant-petitioner had already retired in the year 2016 and during his service tenure, no departmental proceeding was initiated against him. After more than six years, the respondent authority had proceeded against the appellant and held the preliminary enquiry on 21.12.2023 that to an ex-parte even without taking any comment from a retired employee. In administrative action, which also entails civil consequences for a person, the principles of natural justice should be adhered to. Admittedly, no opportunity was given to the appellant before holding the preliminary enquiry and such a decision taken in violation of the principle of natural justice would be void. In the interest of justice, the matter is to be heard on merit before learned Single Judge and accordingly, the order impugned dated 13.3.2024 is set aside - the matter is relegated to the learned Single Judge to consider the matter on merits. The Special Appeal stands partly allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Premature dismissal of writ petition due to retirement of petitioner-appellant and lack of departmental proceedings during service tenure.

Analysis:
The petitioner-appellant, a retired Secretary/General Manager of a cooperative spinning mill, filed a writ petition challenging a preliminary enquiry conducted against him post-retirement. The respondent no.3 engaged the petitioner on a contract basis after his retirement. A complaint was made against another party, leading to a preliminary enquiry against the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the proceedings were initiated without proper permission and in violation of natural justice principles. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition as premature, citing lack of departmental proceedings against the petitioner during his service tenure. The appellant contended that the dismissal was unjust as no opportunity was given to him before the enquiry, and the action was prejudicial to his interest.

The respondent, represented by the Additional Advocate General, opposed the appeal, stating that the petitioner raised a new ground in the appeal which was not part of the original writ petition. The respondent argued that the appeal should be dismissed as the reasons for the writ petition's dismissal were contained in the original order.

Upon reviewing the record and the order of the learned Single Judge, it was found that the preliminary objection raised by the respondents regarding the maintainability of the writ petition was upheld, leading to its premature dismissal. The Court noted that no departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner during his service tenure, and the preliminary enquiry post-retirement lacked adherence to natural justice principles. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's stance on natural justice and civil consequences of administrative actions, emphasizing the need for fair procedures.

In light of the principles of natural justice and the civil consequences involved, the Court set aside the order of premature dismissal and directed the matter to be heard on its merits by the learned Single Judge. The Special Appeal was partly allowed, granting the petitioner an opportunity to present his case before the Court for a fair consideration.