THE INSPECTOR OF PANCHAYATS AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SALEM versus S. ARICHANDRAN & ORS

Citation: [2022] 4 S.C.R. 864 · Decided: 23-09-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
864
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 4 S.C.R.
THE INSPECTOR OF PANCHAYATS AND
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SALEM
v.
S. ARICHANDRAN & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 6776 of 2022)
SEPTEMBER 23, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.]
Service Law – Departmental Inquiry – Dismissal – Non-
compliance of Principles of Natural justice – Impermissibility of –
Held: Respondent-delinquent was facing the departmental inquiry
w.r.t serious charge of misappropriation – As the order of dismissal
was set aside on the ground that the same was in breach of principles
of natural justice, the High Court ought to have remitted the case to
the Disciplinary Authority to conduct the inquiry from the point
that it stood vitiated and to conclude it after furnishing a copy of
the Inquiry Report to the delinquent and giving him an opportunity
to submit his comments thereon – Impugned order passed by the
Division Bench as well as Single Judge of the High Court ordering
reinstatement of the respondent with back wages set aside – Case
remitted to the Disciplinary Authority to conduct the inquiry as
aforesaid – Further, considering the fact that earlier also the
dismissal order was set aside on the ground that it was in breach of
principles of natural justice and the matter was remitted back and
thereafter again when the fresh order of dismissal has been passed,
it is again found to be in violation thereof and again the matter is to
be remitted back, the appeal is allowed with costs of Rs. 50,000/- to
be paid by the appellant to the respondent-delinquent.
Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India and Ors.
v. A. Masilamani (2013) 6 SCC 530 : [2012] 11 SCR
35; State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. v. Rajit Singh, 2022
SCC Online SC 341 : 2022 (5) SCALE 199 – relied
on.
Case Law Reference
[2012] 11 SCR 35
relied on
Para 3
2022 (5) SCALE 199
relied on
Para 3
[2022] 4 S.C.R. 864
864
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
865
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6776
of 2022.
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.10.2021 of the High Court
of Judicature at Madras in W.A. No. 2735 of 2021.
Amit Anand Tiwari, AAG, D. Kumanan, Sheikh F. Kalia, Ms. Mary
Mitzy, Ms. Devyani Gupta, Ms. Tanvi Anand, Advs. for the Appellant.
S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv., M. P. Parthiban, Adv. for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated
29.10.2021 in Writ Appeal No. 2735 of 2021 by which the Division Bench
of the High Court has dismissed the said appeal and has confirmed the
order passed by the learned Single Judge directing the appellant to
reinstate the respondent – original writ petitioner into service and pay
arrears payable to him, the District Collector, Salem District, Tamil Nadu
has preferred the present appeal.
2. That a departmental inquiry was initiated against the respondent,
who was a Panchayat Assistant, for having committed the misconduct
of misappropriation of funds pertaining to Samuthram Panchayat in
connivance with the erstwhile President of the said Panchayat. By order
dated 25.09.2006, an order of punishment was passed against the
respondent – delinquent. The order of punishment was the subject matter
of Writ Petition No. 1710 of 2007 before the High Court.
 2.1 By judgment and order dated 07.01.2009, the High Court
allowed the said Writ Petition by quashing the order of dismissal and
remanded the matter for fresh disposal observing that no inquiry
whatsoever was held as required under the law. That thereafter, on
remand, the inquiry was conducted after affording an opportunity to the
delinquent to defend his case. However, without giving a copy of the
Inquiry Report to the delinquent and without calling for his comments on
the Inquiry Officer’s Report, a fresh order dated 11.06.2009 came to be
passed. The delinquent – respondent filed a writ petition before the High
Court by way of Writ Petition No. 1152 of 2012.
THE INSPECTOR OF PANCHAYATS AND DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, SALEM v. S. ARICHANDRAN
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
866
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 4 S.C.R.
2.2 The learned Single Judge allowed the said writ petition and
ordered reinstatement with back wages by observing that the order of
dismissal dated 11.06.2009 was in breach of principles of Natural Justice
as the copy of the Inquiry Report was not given to the delinquent and
without calling for his comments on the Inquiry Officer’s Report, the
order of dismissal was passed. The ju
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.