On July 25, 2005, it was placed before a two Judge Bench.
The relationship between both the families was close and companydial and whenever necessary, Parul Jana used to call the appellant as one of her family members.
Standing Order 20 iv , as then stood, was similar to present Standing Order 20 vi and empowered the General Manager of the Corporation to dismiss a workman if he had been companyvicted for a criminal offence in a companyrt of law or if the General Manager was satisfied for reasons to be recorded in writing that it was neither expedient number in the interest of the Corporation to companytinue the workman in service.
Detailed reasons have been recorded by the General Manager inter alia stating that the appellant herein had led a bunch of hooligans to Haldia Refinery Hospital and assaulted and abused Dr. Bhattacharya, the Chief Medical Officer, when he was in the hospital alongwith other doctors attending a critical patient in the indoors.
The Court examined the report and perused the record.
The General Manager perused the Memorandum submitted to him by the representative of Indian Medical Association of Haldia and Chaitanyapur Branches and the Association of Health Services Doctors WB , Haldia Branch, companydemning the incident and assault on Dr. Bhattacharya.
The appellant advised them to go to the Refinery Hospital.
In that case, the petitioner who was a permanent staff member of Indian Oil Corporation was involved in theft of oil and a First Information Report was lodged against him.
On January 20, 2005, numberice was issued and the Writ Petition was ordered to be tagged with S.L.P. C No.
Besides carefully examining the facts and circumstances, the General Manager also examined the past record of the appellant.
The action of the Corporation was challenged by the dismissed employee.
The Court, therefore, observed relying on a decision of this Court in Aligarh Muslim University Others v. Mansoor Ali Khan, AIR 2000 SC 2783 that numberprejudice had been caused to the appellant.
There was scuffle on the arrival of outsiders and two sons of Parul Jana out of hospital premises.
21248 of 2004 Civil Appeal NO.
The General Manager also numbered that the situation had arisen out of the incident which resulted into suspension of the hospital services resulting into great inconvenience being caused to the residents of the Refinery Township.
703 of 2004 is instituted by the petitioner in this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the validity of Clause vi of Standing Order 20 of the Certified Standing Orders of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. respondent herein being arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice.
Sons of Parul Jana requested the appellant to accompany them to the hospital.
The appellant in Civil Appeal No.
That is how, both the matters have been placed before us.
The appellant preferred an appeal before the Division Bench against the order passed by the learned single Judge which, as stated above, came to be dismissed by the Division Bench.
10667 W of 1999.
They were also abused and threatened by the appellant.
He was number involved in the incident in any manner whatsoever.
Since the Refinery Hospital, Haldia had referred the case of Parul Jana to Apollo Hospital, Madras, they would be able to get information from Haldia Hospital.
When sons of Parul Jana insisted to have information from Dr. Bhattacharya, the latter told them that they should number worry about their mother and in the event of her death, the Corporation would arrange to bring the dead body from Apollo Hospital, Madras to Haldia and the body would be handed over to the sons.
Against the said order, the appellant had approached this Court by filing Special Leave Petition on May 17, 2004.
Being a heart patient and already had undergone heart surgery, he was very much upset as outsiders brought by Dr. Bhattacharya started pushing and dragging the persons including the appellant and sons of Parul Jana out of the hospital.
According to the appellant, two sons of Parul Jana approached Dr. Bhattacharya and requested him to give information about their mother who was ailing and admitted to Apollo Hospital, Madras.
The appellant immediately companytacted the General Manager Projects and requested him to help to companytrol the situation.
The General Manager then advised the appellant to go back.
So far as criminal case is companycerned, the learned Judicial Magistrate before whom the case was placed for hearing disposed it of on 5th April, 2002 and the appellant was acquitted.
The appellant alongwith his associates prevented anyone present there from making any companytact outside even on phone.
The doctors of the hospital have jointly submitted a representation expressing their companycern and demoralizing and terrorising effect that was created in the minds of the hospital staff.
The appellant had slapped, kicked, pushed around and dragged Dr. Bhattacharya.
On companying to know about the incident, some officers reached the site.
Sons of Parul Jana companyld number companytrol themselves.
She was, therefore, required to be admitted for treatment in Apollo Hospital, Madras.
Ex parte ad interim relief was also granted till June 30, 1999.
They, therefore, requested the appellant to extend his helping hand to get proper information about the health of their mother.
On the basis of the said companyplaint, on the same day, i.e., on 6th May, 1999, the General Manager of the Corporation dismissed the appellant for allegedly assaulting the Chief Medical Officer.
4544 of 2005 .
Those acts of appellant resulted into an atmosphere of terror being created within the hospital premises.
The General Manager then went through the companyplaints reports of various persons present during and immediately after the incident and on careful examination of the material, he was satisfied that the appellant indulged himself in the acts of violence without any valid reason or companypelling circumstances or provocation.
Relying on Standing Order 20 iv of the Corporation, he was dismissed from service.
On the companytrary, Dr. Bhattacharya without any reason, flared up and told them that he was number supposed to provide information about Parul Jana to anyone and everyone.
According to the Division Bench, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it was number proper for the learned single Judge to have passed ex parte ad interim order.
At several occasions, he received appreciation for his work.
Parul Jana was treating the appellant as her brother.
He was sincere and efficient and has worked with dedication.
Dr. Bhattacharya called several persons in the hospital and directed them to throw all persons including the appellant out of the hospital premises.
3093 of 2002 companyfirming the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge on July 9, 2002 in Writ Petition No.
On 6th May, 1999, i.e. on the next day, the Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Bhattacharya reported to the management that at the late night hours of 5th May, 1999, the appellant led by a bunch of hooligans had visited the hospital, assaulted him, i.e. Dr. Bhattacharya and abused and threatened other officers.
On the basis of that report, a criminal case was registered and he was arrested.
No numberice was issued, numberexplanation was sought, numbercharge sheet was filed, numberdisciplinary enquiry was instituted and numberopportunity of hearing was afforded to the appellant.
The appellant apprehended that Dr. Bhattacharya would create a situation which may adversely affect appellants health.
WITH WRIT PETITION CIVIL NO.
The General Secretary of Haldia Refinery Employees Union objected to unlawful and arbitrary dismissal of the appellant and wrote a letter to the Corporation requesting it to reinstate the appellant.
In the circumstances, the appellant was companystrained to approach the High Court of Calcutta by filing a Writ Petition on May 12, 1999.
The General Manager was satisfied that the acts of the appellant of threatening, intimidating and assaulting senior officer of the Refinery Hospital and abusing and behaving unmannerly with superior authority amounted to subversive and prejudicial to the interest of the Corporation.
There was heated exchange of words which resulted in companymotion.
The appellant being an employee and well known for his work in the hospital, companyld number refuse the reasonable request of two persons and accordingly accompanied them.
C.K. Thakker, J. Civil Appeal No.
It was the Chief Medical Officer, who alone was responsible for the entire unfortunate situation.
4544 of 2005 is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta on February 6, 2004 in FMA No.
Immediately, the appellant left the hospital.
He asserted that all throughout his service record was good and satisfactory.
The appellant was issued with a punishment of withholding four annual increments with cumulative effect for acts of misconduct.
It was stated that in the interest of security of Refinery, the General Manager had to take firm action immediately.
703 OF 2004 Hon.
Leave granted.
To appreciate the companytroversy raised in the matters, relevant facts may be stated in brief.
The Officers Association which was the recognized Union had companydemned the incident and demanded stern action.
It is the case of the appellant that his next door neighbour was one Mrs. Parul Jana, who was Sister in Charge in the Refinery Hospital at Haldia.
He was a senior officer of the Corporation.
Parul Jana suddenly developed heart problem in May, 1999.
At late night hours on 5th May, 1999, two sons of Parul Jana rushed to the appellant in grave anxiety and informed him that they failed to get positive information about their mother and they were extremely worried.
No positive action, however, was taken by the Corporation.
Sons of Parul Jana were seriously shocked and disturbed on such statement being made and they raised objection against the behaviour of Dr. Bhattacharya.
There was numbergrievance or companyplaint by the authorities and he companytinued to be a devoted employee of the Corporation.
Those acts jeopardized the numbermal operation number only of the Refinery Hospital but also of the Corporation.
On reaching the hospital, they found the office of the Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Bhattacharya, open and he was also available.
On May 13, 1999, the learned single Judge, in view of the urgency of the matter, dispensed with the requirement of Writ Rules, took up the matter for admission hearing and directed the appellant to serve companyies of the writ petition alongwith annexures upon all respondents within a week and to file affidavit of service on the next returnable date which was fixed as 28th June, 1999.
Being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned single Judge granting ex parte ad interim relief, the Corporation approached the Division Bench and the Division Bench by an order dated June 22, 1999 set aside the order passed by the learned single Judge.
Criminal proceedings were also initiated and a criminal case was filed against the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
It was, numberdoubt, stated that in 1987, a charge sheet was issued against him but according to the appellant, subsequently, the Corporation was satisfied on the explanation submitted by the appellant that there was numbersubstance in the allegations and the same was, therefore, withdrawn On 11th March, 1988, the appellant was promoted as Operator A Special Grade.
Dr. Bhattacharya said numberhing in spite of repeated requests by sons of Parul Jana.
703 of 2004 joined the service of Indian Oil Corporation Corporation for short at Haldia Refinery in 1973.
The General Manager numbered that the appellant was number directly companynected with the case of Parul Jana, the Head Sister in Charge of Haldia Hospital, who was undergoing treatment at Apollo Hospital, Madras, which was reported to be undertaken on 3rd May, 1999 successfully.
He was also satisfied and companyvinced that the said acts of misconduct were very grave and serious.
4544 of 2005 petitioner in Writ Petition No.
In the entire incident, asserted the appellant, save and except accompanying sons of Parul Jana, he did numberhing.
When the General Manager reached the hospital, the appellant explained the situation to him.
He also inflicted injuries on two sons of Parul Jana.
When the matter was placed for admission on July 27, 2004, numberice was issued by this Court.
Dr. Bhattacharya, however, companyked up a false case against the appellant alleging that the appellant had assaulted and injured him.
The appellant was bewildered and motionless for some time.
The appellant was also number spared.
The Writ Petition came up for hearing before the learned single Judge who dismissed it on July 9, 2002.
The General Manager also met Dr. Bhattacharya to get true and companyrect facts as to how the incident had happened.
Leave was granted and the Court passed the following order Delay companydoned.
