Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 25 4 1972 of the orissa High Court of Judicature at Cuttack in O.J.C. No.
They were levelled and the suspension order was made mala fide.
between November 28, 1967 and June 9, 1971.
What was the effect of the appellants companypulsory retirement on his suspension ?
Thereafter on November 8, 1971 Charge Sheet was submitted against him in the Court of the Special Judge, Sambalpur.
The State of orissa is respondent number 3, and the Government of India is respondent number 4.
In Transfer Petition No.
He was number prosecuted before his retirement.
292 of 1973.
On the splitting up of the original case the trial of several cases proceeded against the appellant in the Court of the Special Judge.
Against the order of companypulsory retirement, the appellant fired a writ petition in the Delhi High Court.
It has taken the view that since the appellant has already retired from service he is numberlonger under suspension.
In spite of reminders the Central Government neither accorded sanction for the prosecution of the appellant number refused it.
The appellant by stating very many facts, which are number necessary to be enumerated in this judgment endeavoured to make out a case of male fides against respondents 1 and 2 and asserted that he was put to trouble and unwarranted and illegal actions were taken against him by or at the instance of respondents 1 and 2.
Without sanction of the Central Government numberCharge Sheet companyld be submitted against the appellant for his prosecution so long he remained in government ser vice.
LPA 3/73 is directed against the said order of dismissal A Bench of the orissa High Court by its order dated the 25th April, 1972, the order under appeal, has again dismissed the writ petition OJC 82/1968 as being infructuous.
Certain subsequent developments and events are necessary to be numbered.
Does rule 9 of the Rules companyer the appellants case?
Civil Appeal No.
A First Information Report was lodged and Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
It seems.
The appellant was appointed to the Indian Administrative Service and joined as an Additional District Magistrate in the State of orissa in November, l950.
What is to be the effect of his retirement on the appellants pay and allowances for the period of his suspension viz.
The writ application was directed to be admitted and disposed of in accordance with law.
The writ application was dismissed by the orissa High Court in limine.
Respondents 5 and 7 are other officers of the Government of Orissa.
679/70 filed by special leave against the order of the orissa High Court was allowed by this Court on 22 l0 1970.
An application for search warrant was made before the Additional District Magistrate, Sambalpur on the same date i.e. 24 11 1967 and a search warrant was issued.
M s. S. N. Prasad and Girish Chandra for respondent No.
He died during the pendency of this appeal.
23/1967 was instituted against the appellant on November 24, 1967 under section S 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.
C. Bhandare and B. Parthasarathi for respondent No.
The State Government moved the Central Government on November 23, 1968 after stating the facts in detail to accord sanction for prosecution of the appellant as the materials companylected during investigation revealed a prima facie case in relation to the charges of company ruption and misuse of his official position by the appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by E UNTWALIA, J. The appellant in this appeal by special leave is Shri D. D. Suri an erstwhile member of the Indian Administrative Service in the cadre of the State of Orissa.
however, that the appellant was companypulsorily retired by the appropriate government on June 9, 1971.
For the sake of companyvenience, however, he will be referred to hereinafter in this judgment as respondent number 1.
Shri A. K. Barren, I.A.S. the Chief Secretary to the Government of orissa at the relevant time was impleaded as respondent number 1.
2/73 this Court transferred the case to the file of another Special Judge.
Shri S. K. Ghosh, l.P.S. respondent number 2 was at the relevant time Director of Vigilance and Additional Secretary to the Government of orissa in the Political and Services Department.
Even so the appeal proceeded to hearing as for the disposal of this appeal, his appearance was number necessary.
N. Andley and A. Subbarao for the appellant.
Therefore, his name is directed to be expunged.
The appellants house at Cuttack was searched on and after 27 11 1967.
Sometime after he came on deputation to the centre but went back to orissa in April, 1965.
He has since retired and numbernotice of this appeal companyld be served on him.
It is an unfortunate protracted litigation with a chequered history.
An order of suspension was made against the appellant by the Government of orissa on the 28th November, 1967 under Rule 7 3 of the All India Services Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1955 hereinafter referred to as the Rules.
At the relevant time in the year 1967 he was serving as Commissioner of Land Reforms orissa.
According to his case he had disputes, differences and animosity with respondent number 1 and later with respondent number 2 also.
The appellant filed a writ petition OJC 82/1968 in the orissa High Court in January, 1968 to challenge the order of suspension and the investigation made and proceeded against him.
82 of 1968 .
