LexCAPT. M. PAUL ANTHONY versus BHARAT GOLD MINES LTD. AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
CAPT. M. PAUL ANTHONY A v. BHARAT GOLD MINES LTD. AND ANR. MARCH 30, 1999 [S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND V.N. KHARE, JJ.] B Service Law-Departmental and criminal proceedings on same set of facts continuing simultaneously-Effect of-Raid being conducted and incriminating articles recovered from Appellant's residence-Appellant's request for deferring departmental inquiry to await outcome of criminal C trial rejected-Appellant not attending inquiry on account of ill health and financial difficulties-Inquiry held ex parte and appellant dismissed from service-Thereafter appellant acquitted in criminal case on same facts and examining same witnesses-Finding given that no search was conducted nor any recovery made-Held, it would be unjust and unfair to allow findings D recorded at ex parte departmental enquiry to stand; appellant reinstated with entire arrears of salary-Constitution on India, Articles 14 and 16 Natural Justice-Non-payment of subsistence allowance during pendency of departmental inquiry-Appellant employee unable to attend on account of penury-Request for adjourning inquiry to await decision E in criminal case refused-Proceedings held ex parte and appellant dismissed from service-Held dismissal in violation of natural justice; findings recorded at inquiry stood vitiated-Constitution of India, Articles 14 and 21-Fundamental Rule 53 Constitution of India, Article 136-Appe/lant employee dismissed F consequent upon ex parte departmental proceedings commenced in 1985- Appellant acquitted in 1987 in criminal proceedings on same set of facts- Supreme Court setting aside dismissal in 1999-Held, on facts, no fresh inquiry on same set of facts to be instituted. Appellant was employed with respondent No. 1 as Security Officer. On G June 2, 1985 police conducted a raid at the appellant's ho-use and a mining sponge gold ball and gold bearing sand were recovered by the police. An FIR was lodged on the same day. The next day the appellant was placed under suspension and thereafter served with a charge sheet proposing a regular departmental enquiry. H 257 258 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] 2 S.C.R. A Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. The appellant having been acquitted by a judicial pronouncement with the finding that the "raid and recovery" at his residence were not proved, it would be unjust, unfair and rather oppressive to allow the findings recorded at the ex parte departmental proceedings, to stand. B (273-E) 1.2. Since the facts and the evidence in both the proceedings, namely, the departmental proceedings and the criminal case were the same without there being any iota of difference, the distinction, which is usually drawn as C between the departmental proceedings and the criminal case on the basis of approach and burden of proof, would not be applicable to the instant case. (273-F) Delhi Cloth & General Mills Ltd v. Kushal Bhan, (1960) 3 SCR 227; Tata Oil Mills Company Ltd. v. Workmen, (1964) 7 SCR 555; Jang Bahadur D Singh v. Baij Nath Tiwari, (1969] 1 SCR 134; Kusheshwar Dubey v. Mis Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., (1988) 4 SCC 319; Nelson Matis Vo Union of India, (1992] Supp. 1 SCR 325; State of Rajasthan v. B.K. Meena, [1996] 6 SCC 417 and Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Mohd. Yousuf Miyan, (1997] 2 SCC 699, referred to. E F 2. The appellant had been punished in total violation of the principles of natural justice and he had literally not been afforded any opportunity of hearing. The appellant had not been provided any subsistence allowance during the period of suspension and the adjournment prayed for by him on account of his illness, duly supported by medical certificates was refused resulting in exparte proceedings against him. The appellant was not paid subsistence allowance during the pendency of the departmental proceedings. He informed the respondents that he was unable to attend the enquiry on account of financial difficulties and illness and made several requests for staying the proceedings to await the outcome of the criminal trial. The request was rejected. The proceedings were held ex parte. The appellant was G held guilty dismissed from service in June, 1986. (272-G] . \ The same police officers and panch witnesses who were examined by the Inquiry Officer were examined in the criminal case. On February 3 , 1987, the appellant was acquitted in the criminal case with the finding that no search was con
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.