MC 3432/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI Heard Mr AK Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the applicant Sri BK Nath , former Director of Elementary Education, Assam (under transfer) as well as Mr BJ Ghosh, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam. This application has been filed seeking alteration/ modification/ review of the order dated 5.12.2008 passed in Cont. Case (C) No. 327/2008. By the afor esaid order this Court had directed the Chief Secretary of the State to initiate a departmental proceeding against the applicant and to place him under suspensi on. The said order was felt necessary to be passed by the Court as the applicant had passed an order dated 3.12.2008 by which after holding the contempt petitio ner to be guilty of misappropriation of public money, had thought it fit to re-i nstate him in service. In support of the prayer made in the present Misc. Case, it has been sta ted in the Misc. Case filed that the said order dated 3.12.2008 was thought nece ssary to be passed as the contempt petitioner had drawn a sum of Rs. Two Lakhs f or incurring certain expenses in connection with building works which was half c ompleted and there was no way in which the amount could have been realized from him unless he is re-instated in service. That apart, it has been contended that the order dated 5.12.2008 of the Court should not have been passed without heari ng the applicant and without giving him an opportunity of explanation. The Court does not agree with the view expressed on behalf of the Direct or/applicant that except for re-instatement of the person found guilty of misapp ropriation there can be no other way by which the amount in question can be reco vered from him. Acceptance of such a position, in the considered view of the Cou rt, would be an indication of the ineffectiveness of the laws prevailing in the country to deal with persons who are guilty of misappropriation. In so far as the second contention advanced is concerned, the Director h ad appeared in person before the Court in connection with the contempt proceedin g and at the hearing on 5.12.2008 he was also represented by his counsel. In the course of the proceeding that took place on 5.12.2008 it was not, even for a mo ment, pointed out that the Director desired to be heard in person. It is in the aforesaid circumstances that the order dated 5.12.2008 came to be passed, partic ularly, when the offending order dated 3.12.2008 was a speaking order and the sa me was made available to the Court. Mr BJ Ghosh, learned Govt. Advocate at the hearing today has placed bef ore the Court a communication received by him from the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Education (Secondary) Department which would go to show t hat pursuant to the Court’s order dated 5.12.2008 initiation of a departmental p roceeding against the Director and his suspension has been approved in the file by the departmental minister i.e. the Minister of Education and the notification to the above effect is being issued. For all the aforesaid reasons, the Court does not consider it to be expe dient to cause any vacation/ modification/ alteration or review of its order dat ed 5.12.2008. The Misc. application is, accordingly, dismissed.