Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Anant R. Kulkarni Versus Y.P. Education Society & Ors.

2013 (4) TMI 840 - SUPREME COURT

Misappropriation/embezzlement by Headmaster of the school- Held that:- In the instant case, there is no allegation of misappropriation/embezzlement or any charge which may cast a doubt upon the integrity of the appellant, or further, anything which may indicate even the slightest moral turpitude on the part of the appellant. The charges relate to accounts and to the discharge of his functions as the Headmaster of the school. The appellant has provided satisfactory explanation for each of the all .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ther employees, as a large number of cases had been filed against the Management Committee without impleading the State of Maharashtra, though the same was a necessary party, as the school was a government-aided school. Rules 36 and 37 of the Rules 1981, which prescribe the procedure of holding an enquiry have been violated. The charges levelled against the appellant were entirely vague, irrelevant and unspecific. As per statutory rules, the appellant was not allowed to be represented by another .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sary for the Division Bench to permit the respondents to hold a fresh enquiry on the said charges and that too, after more than a decade of the retirement of the appellant. Appeal succeeds and is allowed. - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3935 of 2013 - Dated:- 26-4-2013 - CHAUHAN, B.S (DR) KALIFULLA, FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM, JJ. J U D G M E N T Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 4.10.2011 of the High Court of Judicature of Bombay in Letters Pate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the school run by the respondents on 7.6.1965, and was promoted as the Head Master of the said school on 21.6.1979. B. A new Management Committee came into power in the year 2000, and began to raise allegations of misconduct against the appellant, as the appellant had certain apprehensions with respect to the eligibility of certain office bearers of the Management Committee. C. The respondents-management issued show-cause notice dated 21.2.2001 to the appell .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gainst the appellant as per the provisions of Rule 36 of the Rules 1981, and in pursuance thereof, a chargesheet dated 17.5.2001 containing 12 charges of misconduct, was served upon the appellant. The appellant vide letter dated 1.7.2001, submitted his clarifications with respect to the said charges that had been levelled against him. E. An Enquiry Committee consisting of two members instead of three, as per the Rules 1981, conducted the enquiry and submitted its enquiry report on 20.5.2002, mak .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dgment and order dated 19.10.2002 held, that none of the charges levelled against the appellant stood proved, and that the enquiry had not been conducted according to the Rules 1981. Thus, the termination order against the appellant was quashed. H. Aggrieved, the respondents-management filed Writ Petition No.1849 of 2003 before the High Court, and the learned Single Judge decided the said writ petition vide judgment and order dated 20.4.2011, upholding the judgment of the Tribunal, and found the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n found to be vague, and that the enquiry was conducted in violation of the statutory Rules 1981, and further that none of the charges reflected embezzlement or mis-appropriation, and cast no doubt upon the integrity of the appellant whatsoever. As the appellant stood retired on 30.9.2002, the question of holding a fresh enquiry in 2011 could not arise. The court does not lack competence to decide the case on merits even if it comes to the conclusion that there has been violation of statutory ru .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rson cannot be allowed to go scot-free simply because he has retired. An enquiry can be conducted against him, and he can be punished by withholding either full or part of his pension. No fault can be found with the impugned judgment and thus, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. We have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. The appeal raises the following substantial questions of law:- (i) In case the punishment is set aside .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

de: 7. It is a settled legal proposition that, once the Court set asides an order of punishment on the ground, that the enquiry was not properly conducted, the Court should not severely preclude the employer from holding the inquiry in accordance with law. It must remit the concerned case to the disciplinary authority, to conduct the enquiry from the point that it stood vitiated, and to conclude the same in accordance with law. However, resorting to such a course depends upon the gravity of deli .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ate Spinning C. Ltd. v. R.S. Pandey & Anr., (2005) 8 SCC 264; and Union of India v. Y.S. Sandhu, Ex-Inspector AIR 2009 SC 161). Enquiry at belated stage: 8. The court/tribunal should not generally set aside the departmental enquiry, and quash the charges on the ground of delay in initiation of disciplinary proceedings, as such a power is de hors the limitation of judicial review. In the event that the court/tribunal exercises such power, it exceeds its power of judicial review at the very th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

g so the Court must weigh all the facts, both for and against the delinquent officers and come to the conclusion, which is just and proper considering the circumstances involved. The essence of the matter is that the court must take into consideration all relevant facts, and balance and weigh the same, so as to determine, if it is infact in the interest of clean and honest administration, that the said proceedings are allowed to be terminated, only on the ground of a delay in their conclusion. ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, LIC of India & Ors. v. A. Masilamani, JT (2012) 11 SC 533). Enquiry - on vague charges : 9. In Surath Chandra Chakravarty v. The State of West Bengal, AIR 1971 SC 752 this Court held, that it is not permissible to hold an enquiry on vague charges, as the same do not give a clear picture to the delinquent to make out an effective defence as he will be unaware of the exact nature of the allegations against him, and what kind of defence he should put up for rebuttal thereof. The Court observe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

If a person is not told clearly and definitely what the allegations are on which the charges preferred against him are founded, he cannot possibly, by projecting his own imagination, discover all the facts and circumstances that may be in the contemplation of the authorities to be established against him. (Emphasis added) 10. Where the chargesheet is accompanied by the statement of facts and the allegations are not specific in the chargesheet, but are crystal clear from the statement of facts, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

adduced should not be perfunctory, even if the delinquent does not take the defence of, or make a protest with against that the charges are vague, that does not save the enquiry from being vitiated, for the reason that there must be fair-play in action, particularly in respect of an order involving adverse or penal consequences. What is required to be examined is whether the delinquent knew the nature of accusation. The charges should be specific, definite and giving details of the incident whic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ly with a view to establish the charges levelled against him or to impose a penalty, but is also conducted with the object of such an enquiry recording the truth of the matter, and in that sense, the outcome of an enquiry may either result in establishing or vindicating his stand, and hence result in his exoneration. Therefore, fair action on the part of the authority concerned is a paramount necessity. Enquiry against a retired employee: 12. This Court in NOIDA Entrepreneurs Association v. NOID .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

p; Anr. v. Rajinder Lal Capoor, AIR 2008 SC 1831. 13. In State of Assam & Ors. v. Padma Ram Borah, AIR 1965 SC 473, a Constitution Bench of this Court held that it is not possible for the employer to continue with the enquiry after the delinquent employee stands retired. The Court observed:- According to the earlier order of the State Government itself, the service of the respondent had come to an end on March 31, 1961. The State Government could not by unilateral action create a fresh contr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ought to be taken against a government servant it must be done before he retires as provided by the said rule. If a disciplinary enquiry cannot be concluded before the date of such retirement, the course open to the Government is to pass an order of suspension and refuse to permit the concerned public servant to retire and retain him in service till such enquiry is completed and a final order is passed therein. 15. In Kirti Bhusan Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors., AIR 1986 SC 2116, this Court .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Directors, O.S.F.C. & Ors., AIR 1999 SC 1841, this Court observed: … There is also no provision for conducting a disciplinary enquiry after retirement of the appellant and nor any provision stating that in case misconduct is established, a deduction could be made from retiral benefits. Once the appellant had retired from service on 30-6-1995, there was no authority vested in the Corporation for continuing the departmental enquiry even for the purpose of imposing any reduction in th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erving that in the case of retirement, master and servant relationship continue for grant of retrial benefits. The proceedings for recovery of financial loss from an employee is permissible even after his retirement and the same can also be recovered from the retrial benefits of the said employee. 18. Thus, it is evident from the above, that the relevant rules governing the service conditions of an employee are the determining factors as to whether and in what manner the domestic enquiry can be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t respondent did not submit dead stock verification report in spite of several letters. (b) Charge No.2:-The first respondent did not submit the documents such as cash books, ledgers and voucher files in spite of demands made by the management. (c) Charge No.3:- relates to not calling School Committee meeting and causing loss of ₹ 48851/- as no timely approval was obtained for that expenditure from the school committee. (d) Charge No.4:- The first respondent did not send appointment propos .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issioner, Latur even though there was no stay/injunction. (g) Charge No.7:- The first respondent did not attend any of the 11 meetings of the Managing Committee in the capacity as a Head Master. (h) Charge No.8:- The first respondent did not submit explanation regarding his teaching workload though asked for by the management as per letter No. S/167 dated 11.12.2000. (i) Charge No.9:- The first respondent did not give his explanation about donation of ₹ 4900/ - given by the Lioness Club of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and the Deputy Director of Education, Pune Region, Pune. The charges were found proved and punishment was imposed. 20. The Tribunal examined all the issues involved, and recorded its specific findings as under: The charge No.11 is in respect of excessive telephone bills. The telephone bill for the academic year 1999- 2000 is ₹ 3931/-. According to Management this is excessive bill. The charge is vague. The explanation given by appellant that specifically no call was made for private purpos .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

alls are made to Pune and Thane. These calls have properly been explained that Writ petition was filed against the school and these calls were made to the Advocate concerned in connection with the Writ Petition. Calling such an explanation on every call by the Management to the Head Master is nothing but over victimizing or interference of Management in day-to-day business of the school. xx xx xx xx There is no evidence brought before the Inquiry Committee to hold guilty for these charges. But t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

chool are audited by the authorized auditor. Under these circumstances, calling these record seems to be only for finding loop holes. This is a sort of interference of the Management in day-to-day work of the school, which is unwarranted. In spite of this, the explanation shows that there is sufficient compliance of direction and there is no insubordination. (iii) Charge No.3, is not calling meetings of school committee as per code….and the explanation submitted by appellant not calling t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to have been framed at all. xx xx xx xx (vii) Charge No.7, is in respect of not attending the Management council meeting. This charge is also purely technical. The explanation of the appellant is that intimation of meeting was given by the Management at the 11th hour before few hours of the meeting without providing agenda of the meeting…. The explanation needs sympathetic consideration and the allegations if at all considered, cannot be a ground for termination of appellant s service. (v .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lty of the charges. The net result of the scrutiny of the proceedings is that the inquiry seems to have been initiated on very technical flaws which lead to only conclusion that it was pre-determined and pre-judicial inquiry. As explained above, there is no sufficient proof on record to hold that the charges are proved. 21. The Tribunal, as well as the learned Single Judge of the High Court have recorded a categorical finding of fact to the effect that initiation of departmental enquiry against .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ommittee, one to be nominated by the employees from amongst themselves, and one to be chosen by the Chief Executive Officer, from amongst a panel of teachers who have been awarded National/State awards. In the instant case, there was only a two member committee. The procedure prescribed under the Rules is based on the Principles of Natural Justice and fair play, to ensure that an employee of a private school, may not be condemned unheard. It is pertinent to note that the Management committee fai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for want of a particular requirement. Thus, in light of such a fact situation, the Division Bench has committed an error by giving liberty to the respondents to hold a fresh enquiry. 23. The Division Bench after examining the case, held as under: (i) If there was defect found in the manner in which the departmental enquiry was held, liberty should have been given to the management to hold a fresh enquiry if so advised, and if the appellant was found guilty thereafter, punishment could have been .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nation of the appellant from service, till the date of his retirement. 24. The conclusion reached by the Division Bench that the Tribunal and the learned Single Judge had found that there was a defect in the manner in which the enquiry was held, and therefore there was no question of it recording a finding on merit to the effect that charges levelled against the appellant were not proved, is also not sustainable in law. It is always open for the Court in such a case, to examine the case on merit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appellant. The charges relate to accounts and to the discharge of his functions as the Headmaster of the school. The appellant has provided satisfactory explanation for each of the allegations levelled against him. Moreover, he has retired in the year 2002. The question of holding any fresh enquiry on such vague charges is therefore, unwarranted and uncalled for. 26. The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Solapur, had filed an affidavit before the High Court, wherein it was stated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n violated. The charges levelled against the appellant were entirely vague, irrelevant and unspecific. As per statutory rules, the appellant was not allowed to be represented by another employee. Thus, the procedure prescribed under Rule 57(1) of the Rules 1981 stood violated. No chargesheet containing the statement of allegations was ever served. A summary of the proceedings, alongwith the statements of witnesses, as is required under Rule 37(4) of the Rules 1981, was never forwarded to the app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version