http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT OF C.S.T..EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION &

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: A. RAGHUPATHY BHAT & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       03/01/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      We have heard counsel on both sides.      This appeal  by special  leave arises from the order of the Karnataka  High Court,  made on 18.4.1996 in C.R.P. Nos. 934/93 and 2362/93 and the order dated 5.8.1996 in C.P. Nos. 365 and 366 of 1996.      The  admitted  position  is  that  the  respondent  was suspended from  service on  18.3.1989. Domestic  enquiry was conducted and  the order  of removal  was passed. A petition was filed  by the  respondent against  the said order before the Tribunal constituted under Karnataka Education At, 1983. The Tribunal on finding that the respondent was not paid the subsistence allowance,  set aside  the order  of termination and remitted  the matter for fresh enquiry. In revision, the High  Court  stayed  the  domestic  enquiry  and  the  civil petition was allowed by the High Court. Thus, this appeal by special leave.      It is  not necessary  for us  to go  into the merits of this matter. Rules 12(3) and 12(4) of the Rules framed under Karnataka Private  Educational  Institutions  (Discipline  & Control) Act,  provide that  in a  case where  a penalty  of dismissal, removal  or compulsory  retirement  from  service imposed upon  an employee  is set  aside in  an appeal or on review under  these Rules  and  the  case  is  remitted  for further inquiry  or action  or with  any other  direction or under  Rules   12(4)  of  the  Rules  is  rendered  void  in consequence of  or by  a decision  of a Court of law and the disciplinary authority on consideration of the circumstances of the  case, decides to hold further enquiry against him on the allegations  on which  the penalty of dismissal, removal or  compulsory   retirement  was   originally  imposed,  the employee  shall   be  deemed   to  have  been  placed  under suspension by  the appointing authority from the date of the original  order   of  dismissal,   removal   or   compulsory retirement and  shall continue  to remain  under  suspension until further  orders. Thus,  it can  be seen that the Rules provide  for   further  enquiry   to  be  conducted  by  the disciplinary authority.  It is settled law that the employee has power  to conduct enquiry afresh from the stage at which

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

the illegality  in the  proceedings is  found vitiating  the action.  The   High  Court   is,  therefore,  not  right  in foreclosing further enquiry after upholding the order of the Tribunal which  has held  that there  is  need  for  further enquiry and  the order  of removal  was set aside because of non-payment of  subsistence allowance.  The question whether the order  of removal  was bad  in law  for  non-payment  of subsistence allowance  is left  open, as  it  has  not  been canvassed. The  disciplinary authority’s proceeding further, as a  consequence of  remittance of  the order,  is  clearly adumbrated under  Rules 12(3) or Rule 12(4), as the case may be. It  is now well settled by a Constitution Bench decision of this  Court in  Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad & Ors. vs. B.  Karunakar &  Ors. [(1993)  4  SCC  727]  that  as  a consequence of  setting aside  of order  or  termination  or removal or  dismissal further  enquiry  is  required  to  be undertaken from  that stage.  Pending enquiry,  the employee must  be   deemed  to   be  under  suspension.  Under  these circumstances, the  High Court  was not right in foreclosing the further enquiry. The appellants are directed to continue and complete the enquiry within a period of four months from today and  until the  final order,  the respondent  must  be deemed to be under suspension.      We are informed that the respondent has been paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-  (Rupees two  lacs only),  pursuant to  the directions issued  by the  High Court. The said payment will be subject  to the result of the enquiry and final order and must be   adjusted,  as a  consequence of  the order  of the enquiry report towards subsistence allowance or otherwise.