2022 (10) TMI 509 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Termination of petitioner form services - Action against the Junior clerk with the Sales Tax Department - bogus billing being carried out by the main accused one Nilesh Mali - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Apparently perusal of the inquiry officer s report would indicate that it is a mere reproduction of reply and response of the Presenting Officer and on that basis holding the charges as proved. This is in violation of the principles of natural justice and the rules in question. Obviously apparent it is that the inquiry officer and the disciplinary authorities have rushed through the proceedings in a slipshod manner throwing the rule book to the winds merely to comply with the time limit in the order dated 30.11.2021 in the petition filed earlier. The order dated 30.03.2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits as if the order dated 30.03.2022 was never passed - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to termination order based on principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner was terminated from services following an FIR related to bogus billing, leading to suspension in 2017. Despite a chargesheet in 2018, the departmental proceedings were delayed. A court order mandated completion by 31.03.2022, but the dismissal order was issued on 30.03.2022, prompting the challenge. The petitioner argued that the dismissal violated natural justice due to rushed proceedings.

The petitioner's counsel contended that the inquiry lacked a full-fledged process as per rules, citing cases like Kuldeep Singh and Roop Singh Negi to support claims of procedural lapses. The respondent, represented by the AGP, defended the inquiry report, stating charges were proven, especially given the seriousness of the accusations.

The court reviewed the earlier order setting the deadline for departmental proceedings, emphasizing cooperation from the petitioner. However, a detailed examination of the inquiry officer's report revealed procedural irregularities. The inquiry officer's reliance on the presenting officer's submissions without proper examination of evidence violated natural justice and procedural rules.

Referring to the Roop Singh Negi case, the court highlighted the importance of proving charges with admissible evidence, not mere suspicions. The inquiry officer's report was found to lack proper reasoning and legal basis, indicating a rushed and unjust process. Consequently, the court quashed the dismissal order and directed the petitioner's reinstatement with benefits, allowing for a fresh inquiry following proper procedures from a specific stage.

In summary, the judgment focused on the violation of natural justice principles and procedural irregularities in the termination process, leading to the quashing of the dismissal order and reinstatement of the petitioner for a fair and lawful inquiry.