--- 1 --- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE S.B.: HON'BLE MR. S. C. SHARMA, J WRIT PETITION NO. 6167 / 2003 MICHAEL DAMOR S/O PASCAL DAMOR Vs. STATE OF MP & THREE OTHERS * * * * * O R D E R ( 01/11/2011) The petitioner before this Court has filed this present writ petition being aggrieved by the order dt. 26/5/98 by which a punishment of compulsory retirement has been inflicted upon him. The contention of the petitioner is that he was serving as an accountant in the School Education Department of the State of Madhya Pradesh and an order of suspension was passed on 25/3/96 for allegedly committing certain misconduct. Petitioner has further stated that a charge sheet was finally issued on 6/5/96 and it was alleged that the petitioner has caused wrongful loss to the state exchequer to the tune of Rs.639682/-. Besides aforesaid charge other serious charges were also levelled against the --- 2 --- petitioner. Petitioner has further stated that additional charge sheet issued on 21/8/96 and the petitioner denied the charges levelled against him. Petitioner has further stated that an enquiry took place and based upon the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority has passed the impugned order dt. 26/5/98. The petitioner has raised various grounds before this Court and his contention is that the charges are vague in nature and therefore on the basis of vagues charges the impugned order of punishment could not have been passed. He has also stated that the enquiry officer demanded money from him for exonerating him, however, as he has failed to oblige the enquiry officer, an adverse enquiry report was submitted by the Inquiry Officer.. It has also been stated that the procedure adopted by the disciplinary authority and the enquiry officer is violative of principles of natural justice and fair play. Petitioner has further stated that the lapses, if any, are on the part of some outsider who is responsible for pay fixation in respect of 11 teachers and the order passed by the disciplinary authority is bad in law as a criminal case was also pending at the relevant point of time. It has also --- 3 --- been stated that certain documents were not furnished to the petitioner and therefore the enquiry conducted by the enquiry officer is bad in law. A reply has been filed in the matter and the stand of the State is that the petitioner was granted all documents as reflected in the charge sheet and he was permitted to inspect the entire record before the enquiry officer. It has also been stated that the petitioner was responsible in the matter of pay fixation of 11 teachers and those teachers being aggrieved by the action of the State Government initiating recovery have challenged the orders of recovery before the M P State Administrative Tribunal and the Original Application ie., OA NO. 291 / 1996 preferred by Shri Kansingh has been dismissed. It has also been stated that on account of the lapses committed by the petitioner, the State Exchequer was subjected to financial loss and therefore the enquiry officer after following the prescribed procedure has rightly held the petitioner guilty of the alleged misconduct. The respondents have also stated that the disciplinary authority after following the prescribed procedure as prescribed under the --- 4 --- MP Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1976 has rightly inflicted the punishment of compulsory retirement and in fact, the disciplinary authority has shown leniency in the matter by passing an order of compulsory retirement and by inflicting a recovery of Rs.67,646/-. The respondents have prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that a charge sheet was issued on 6/5/96 for causing loss to the tune of Rs.639682/- to the State exchequer and additional charge sheet was issued on 21/8/96 and thereafter the enquiry officer has conducted a detailed enquiry. The order sheet of the Departmental Enquiry which is also on record as Annexure R/3 reflects that the petitioner has inspected all the documents before the enquiry officer and therefore by no stretch of imagination it can be presumed that the respondents have denied inspection of documents to the petitioner. Not only this, the respondents have conducted the --- 5 --- enquiry strictly in consonance with the procedure prescribed under the MP Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1976. The petitioner was permitted to examine the documents, to go through the entire record, to cross examine the witnesses and to file appropriate reply and therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for interference keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case. Merely because at a later stage, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner, does not mean that the order passed by the competent disciplinary authority dt. 26/5/98 deserves to be reviewed. The order passed by the disciplinary authority is based upon the evidence adduced during the Departmental Enquiry and in the Departmental Enquiry the principles of preponderance of probability is looked into and therefore as there was enough evidence against the petitioner the disciplinary authority has rightly taken a lenient view by inflicting a punishment of compulsory retirement. As the petitioner has not been able to make out any ground establishing any --- 6 --- procedural irregularity or any ground establishing violation of principles of natural justice and fair play, no case for interference is made out in the matter. The writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. (S. C. SHARMA) J U D G E KR