http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  6979 of 2004

PETITIONER: DIRECTOR (MARKETING) INDIAN OIL CORPN. LTD. & ANR.

RESPONDENT: SANTOSH KUMAR

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 23/05/2006

BENCH: Dr. AR. LAKSHMANAN & LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA

JUDGMENT: J  U  D  G  M  E  N  T

Dr. AR.  LAKSHMANAN,  J.

       Director (Marketing) and General Manager  (Operations),  Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. are the appellants  before us.  The respondent  is a dismissed employee of the  Appellant-Corporation.  The respondent joined the appellant  - Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as  "The  Corporation")    in the year 1987.  He was posted as  Assistant Manager (Operation) at Hissar Depot of the  Corporation in the year 1995.  He was charge-sheeted  on  account of irregular supply of High Speed Diesel to the  purchasers without following the procedure.  The incident  happened at Hissar Depot and 12 KL of High Speed Diesel   was supplied twice from 17.6.1996 to 19.6.1996 against the  same challan by the respondent.  A charge-sheet was  issued to the respondent.  Eight charges were framed  against the respondent.  The Enquiry Officer submitted his  report which is available at page 26 to 40 of the paper book.   The Enquiry Officer found the respondent guilty of charge  Nos. 1,4,5,6,7 and 8.  The other charges have not been  proved.  The Disciplinary Authority agreed with the findings  of the Enquiry Officer after taking into all aspects  of the  case into consideration.   The Enquiry Officer proposed to  inflict upon the respondent the major penalty of "dismissal"  as a measure of disciplinary action against him.  All papers  relating to this case, in respect of respondent,  were placed  before General Manager (Operations),  CDA   for his perusal  and orders.    The Disciplinary Authority after perusing the  records and the replies submitted to the show cause notice  together with all papers relating to the disciplinary  proceedings  and after applying his mind ordered for  inflicting  upon the respondent the penalty of "dismissal" as  a measure of disciplinary action against him.   The period of  suspension of respondent was, however, treated as  suspension only.

       An appeal was filed against the order of penalty of  "dismissal".  The Disciplinary Authority placed all the  papers relating to the case before the Director (Marketing),  Appellate Authority for his perusal and orders.   

       The Director (Marketing)- Appellate Authority  passed  the order rejecting the appeal of the respondent.

         Aggrieved against the order of dismissal, the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

respondent preferred Civil Writ No. 11144 of 2000 before the  High Court of Punjab & Haryana alleging that even though a  detailed reply and representation was submitted to the  show cause notice, the same has not been gone into  and  without appreciating the stand taken by the respondent, the  Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority have  mechanically passed an order affirming the penalty  of  dismissal upon the respondent.         Several other grounds had also been taken on merits  of the claim by the writ petitioner (respondent herein).  The  Writ Petition was contested  by the Corporation  by filing its  counter in the affidavit.   It was also specifically stated in  the counter-affidavit about the punishment awarded to the  respondent for theft and fraud etc. and the imposition of  punishment of "dismissal" from the service.           Before the High Court,  a solitary contention was  raised on behalf of respondent stating that despite a  detailed response  preferred by the respondent herein, the  Appellate Authority passed the order dated 15.5.2000  without considering any of the issues raised by the  respondent herein as petitioner in the writ petition.  The  learned Judges of the High Court had also perused the  records placed before them by the Corporation.  It is seen  from the impugned order passed by the High Court that the  Judges were satisfied that no reasons whatever had been  recorded in either not accepting  the issues raised by the  respondent in response to the show cause notice nor had  the claim of the respondent made in  the various grounds  raised by him in his appeal been considered.  The learned  Judges of the Division Bench felt that the orders of  punishment dated 30.12.1999 as well as the order dated  15.5.2000 by which the respondent’s appeal had been  rejected are cryptic and non-speaking orders and, therefore,   the orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority  and  Appellate Authority are liable to be set-aside on the ground  of non-application of mind.  The High Court also held that  the action taken by the authorities  is arbitrary.  However,  the learned Judges, while setting- aside the order of  dismissal as well as the appellate order, issued a direction  to the appellant-Corporation to reinstate into service with  continuity in service with all consequential benefits.  Liberty   was also reserved to the appellant to re-initiate the enquiry  from the stage of consideration by the Punishing Authority   and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.         Aggrieved by the above judgment, the Corporation  has come up in appeal before us.         We have heard Mr. Jagat Arora, learned counsel for  the appellant and Mr. Manjit Singer, learned counsel for the  respondent.  The learned counsel for the Corporation  submitted that all the documentary records were placed  before  the Disciplinary Authority and  also before the  Appellate Authority  and that  the Disciplinary Authority   and the Appellate Authority after perusing  the entire record  and the  report of the Enquiry Officer came to the  conclusion that the order of dismissal passed by the  Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority does not  call for any interference.  The learned counsel also  submitted that the findings of fact recorded by the  Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority is not  liable to be interferred with and that  there is no requirement  for giving detailed reasons when the Disciplinary Authority  and Appellate Authority are in agreement with the findings  of the Enquiry Officer.   In support of the above contentions,  the learned counsel for the appellant placed strong reliance  on the judgment reported as National Fertilizers Ltd. and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

Anr. Vs. P.K. Khanna,  2005(7) SCC 597 to which one of us  (Hon.  Lakshmanan, J.)  was a party.  Alternatively  the  learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that the  direction issued by the High Court ordering reinstatement  into service with continuity in service and all consequential  benefits ought not to have been issued at the stage when  the High Court itself found that the enquiry had not been  properly conducted and the officers had not applied their  minds before passing the order of dismissal.

       We have also perused the order passed by the  General Manager (Operations) which is available at page 51  and the order passed by the Director (Marketing) who is the  appellate authority. A close scrutiny of both the orders   would only go to show that the Appellate Authority has  simply adopted the language employed by the Disciplinary  Authority and inflicted the punishment of dismissal on the  respondent herein.           For the sake of convenience, we extract both the  orders available at page 51-52 of the paper book:  

"I  have carefully gone through Shri Santosh  Kumar, Emp. No. 19957, Ex-AM(Ops) Hissar  Depot’s appeal dated 25.3.2000 together with  all papers relating to the disciplinary case  initiated against him vide charge-sheet No.  IR/1461/(N-113) dated 24.6.97 in the capacity of  the Competent Disciplinary Authority.

I have applied my mind and I find that Shri  Santosh Kumar has not brought out any point  in his appeal dated 25.3.2000 which may  warrant any change in the said final order  passed by me as the Competent Disciplinary  Authority.

The appeal of Shri Santosh Kumar is hereby  forwarded to Director(M)-the Appellate  Authority for his kind consideration and orders.

                    General Manager (Operations )

I  have carefully gone through Shri Santosh  Kumar, Emp. No. 19957, Ex-AM(Ops) Hissar  Depot’s appeal dated 25.3.2000 together with  all papers relating to the disciplinary case  initiated against him vide charge-sheet No.  IR/1461/(N-113) dated 24.6.97.  Shri Santosh  Kumar has preferred an appeal against the  order of penalty of "Dismissal", inflicted upon  him by GM(Ops.) - the Competent Disciplinary  Authority vide reference No. IR/1461/(N-113)  dated 30.12.1999 as a measure of disciplinary  action against Shri Santosh Kumar.

I have applied my mind and I find that Shri  Santosh Kumar has not brought  out any point  which may warrant my interference with the  said orders passed by the Competent  Disciplinary Authority.  Accordingly, I  hereby  reject the appeal of Shri Santosh Kumar.  Let  Shri Santosh Kumar be advised accordingly.

                                 Director (Marketing)"

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

       A perusal of the order passed by the Appellate  Authority  would only reveal the total non-application of  mind by the Appellate Authority.   We, therefore, have no  other option except  to set-aside the order passed by the  Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority and remit  the matter for fresh disposal  to the Disciplinary Authority.    The Disciplinary Authority shall consider the detailed   representation  made by the respondent and also consider  the detailed report of the Enquiry Officer and the records  placed before him in its proper perspective and decide the  matter afresh on merits.  The Disciplinary Authority is   directed to consider the entire case only on the basis of  records already on record.  The respondent is not permitted  to place any further material or record before the  Disciplinary Authority.  The order passed by the High Court  is set-aside for the above reason.    We also set-aside the  direction issued by the High Court ordering re-instatement  into service with continuity in service and all  consequential  benefits.  The Disciplinary Authority is also directed to  dispose of the matter, within three months from the date of  receipt of this order,  after affording an opportunity to both  the parties.  The Civil Appeal is disposed of accordingly.   No order as to costs.