Shri U.K.Banerjee v. The Union Of India And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WP.CT/5/2023 Shri U.K. Banerjee Vs.

The Union of India and others Mr. P.C.Das Mr. Arul Prasanth ... for the petitioner Mr.Shatadru Chakraborty ... for the Administration February 22, 2023 [SR] Item No.3 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

A very short point ingrained to Rule 15(4) of the CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965 is raised before us.

Charge has been framed against the petitioner in a disciplinary proceedings to the effect that he did not take any steps, being Executive Engineer (In-Charge) to file appeal against the Arbitral Award dated 30.12.2017 and 20.01.2018 passed by Arbitrator and put the Zilla Parishad to heavy financial loss.

The writ petitioner is stated to have filed a representation before the Disciplinary Authority within the ambit of Rule 15(4) of the aforesaid 1965 Rules, praying therein that he was the Executive Engineer (In-Charge) with effect from 04.05.2018 till 04.06.2018 and by the time he took charge, the period of limitation for appeal had already expired. The said representation is stated to be pending before the Disciplinary Authority.

The wording of Rule 15(4) makes it very clear that the said representation of the petitioner is to be disposed of by

the Disciplinary Authority/Appropriate Government and the inquiry should not proceed further in the matter as specified in sub-rule 5 and 6 thereof till disposal of the representation. Learned Tribunal in paragraph 10 of the impugned judgment has interpreted the aforesaid provision, but refused to exercise its jurisdiction in the matter, the same being prematured. In view of such facts and positions, we dispose of the present writ petition by observing that learned Disciplinary Authority should dispose of the representation of the petitioner in accordance with Rule 15(4) of the 1965 Rules, within a period of eight weeks hence and thereafter the enquiry should proceed in accordance with law. We feel persuaded to observe here that in the peculiarity of the facts, we having passed the aforesaid order, this will not be a binding precedent and we would make it clear that we have not gone into the merit of the case and has not at all decided regarding the liability or non-liability of the petitioner.

With the aforesaid observation, the order of the Tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. The writ petition, being WP.CT/5/2023 is disposed of. ( Chitta Ranjan Dash, J.) ( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )