Madhya Pradesh High Court Directs Indore Municipal Corporation To Pay Rs 1 Lakh For Illegally Terminating Charge Clerk
Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently imposed a cost of Rs One Lakh on Indore Municipal Corporation for falsely foisting the blame on a Charge Clerk for not preparing the chargesheet against a beldar who was in possession of properties allegedly disproportionate to his known source of income.The single-judge bench of Justice Vivek Rusia also noticed that the disciplinary action taken against...
Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently imposed a cost of Rs One Lakh on Indore Municipal Corporation for falsely foisting the blame on a Charge Clerk for not preparing the chargesheet against a beldar who was in possession of properties allegedly disproportionate to his known source of income.
The single-judge bench of Justice Vivek Rusia also noticed that the disciplinary action taken against the charge clerk was merely a ploy to save the image of the Municipal Corporation in the public.
“If the matter of Mohammed Aslam Khan was so serious, the then Commissioner ought to have directed the subordinate officer to call the file and prepare a note sheet. The Corporation itself took the decision to reinstate Mohammed Aslam Khan into the service and he is in service, this petitioner has been blamed for it to save the image in public, therefore, the entire action of removal of this petitioner is illegal, a misuse of power, arbitrary and liable to be condemned with strong words.”, the bench sitting at Indore noted while reprimanding the corporation and reinstating the petitioner employee to the service with full back wages and benefits. The cost imposed upon the Corporation will also be payable to the petitioner employee.
Mohammed Aslam Khan was terminated after Special Police Establishment ( Lokayukt) conducted a raid in his house. This order of termination was modified by the appellate authority and he was taken back into service. Later, this act of the Corporation reinstating the beldar drew flak from all over the media. After reconsidering the matter in light of the controversy, the Corporation initiated a departmental enquiry against the Deputy Commissioner, Superintendent as well and the petitioner employee for not framing the information of charges in respect of the raid properly. After enquiry, the petitioner got suspended on 09.03.2022 for not preparing the charge sheet and for not forwarding the relevant orders essential in the enquiry against the allegedly delinquent beldar. On 22.06.2022, the petitioner employee was terminated from the service. According to the petitioner, he was ousted from the service within four months of the enquiry as a ‘scapegoat’ for the Municipality.
The court observed that the Department cannot unevenly place the blame on the petitioner clerk when the Commissioner is primarily the competent authority to take disciplinary action, followed by the Superintendent. The authority to draft and frame charges always lies with the Disciplinary Authority or such authority as delegated by the Disciplinary Authority. The responsibility to draft charges and submit the note sheet, by no stretch of imagination, can be attributed to a clerk like the terminated petitioner, the court observed.
“The office of Municipal Corporation Indore is in one building and within one campus, every officer knows what is happening with the employee. The raid of the Lokayukt in the house of Mohammed Aslam Khan was known to everyone, this matter was widely published in the newspaper. It cannot be believed that due to non-submission of the note-sheet, the higher authority had no knowledge about the matter of Aslam Khan…”
While setting aside the impugned orders passed by the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority, the court went on to term the departmental enquiry as an ‘empty formality’. Mohammed Aslam Khan was suspended on 08.08.2018 whereas the petitioner employee joined as the in-charge clerk of the establishment section at the Head Office only on 02.07.2019, which itself goes to show that the latter was not posted there at the relevant point of time, the court remarked. At that time, the petitioner who was given a compassionate appointment in 2005, was posted in the Bulk Waste Collection Department.
Moreover, when a charge clerk is only responsible for maintaining the file and recording the documents for the concerned office, the court was puzzled by the arguments advanced by the respondents to the contrary. A charge clerk has no say in initiating proceedings against a delinquent employee or placing the charge sheet before the competent authority, the court further clarified.
“The Enquiry Officer, Disciplinary Officer and Appellate Authority all have failed to appreciate that the in charge clerk is not supposed to write a note-sheet or take a decision for initiation of any enquiry, it is for the Superintendent or Disciplinary Authority to instruct him or dictate him the contents of note-sheet.”
When the respondents tried to assert that the preparation of charge sheet and submission of note sheet is a clerical job that should have been discharged by the petitioner beldar, the court found such a stance to be rather unusual.
“…This Court is shocked and surprised that in Municipal Corporation, Indore the work of preparation of charge and imputation of charges are being handled by Beldar or charge clerk…”, Justice Vivek Rusia accordingly noted in the order.
Among the other functionaries imputed with misconduct along with the petitioner for not framing the charge sheet properly, the enquiry against the Superintendent has not been completed whereas the enquiry against the Deputy Commissioner has not even commenced yet.
Advocate Rishi Tiwari appeared for the petitioner and Advocate Aniket Naik appeared for the respondents.
Case Title: Mehfooj Khan v. State of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal Secretary, Urban Administration And Housing Department & Ors.
Case No: Writ Petition No. 23386 of 2022