JABALPUR, India, Dec. 14 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgmenton Nov. 13:

1. The instant writ appeal is preferred by taking exception to the order dated 06.12.2024 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. No.12101/2024, whereby the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 was allowed and the charge-sheet issued to the respondent was quashed.

2. Heard Shri Greeshm Jain, Advocate appeared on behalf of appellant and Shri K.C. Ghildiyal, Senior Advocate with Shri Karnik Singh, Advocate appeared on behalf of respondent No.1.

3. With the consent of the parties, arguments heard for the purpose of final disposal of the appeal.

4. The short facts of the case are that, respondent is working with appellant company and currently posted as Deputy Manager, (HR/Pers.). A charge-sheet was served upon the respondent on 13/15-04-2024 in furtherance of the direction issued by Government of India, Ministry of Coal by its letter dated 28.02.2024 to hold an inquiry against the respondent on the imputed charges under Section 30 of the Coal India Executives' Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 2021. Respondent belongs to the cadre of Executive who made a complaint against Mr. Ram Baboo Prasad, Ex. Director (Tech.) vide email dated 15.02.2024 raising an issue of misconduct regarding his omission of taking previous sanction from competent authority for securing employment of his son Mr. Abhishek Kumar in the Renusagar Thermal Project of Hindalco Industries with whom NCL had professional transactions.

5. The allegation was leveled against Mr. Ram Baboo Prasad that he abused his authoritative position and in violation of the rules, without obtaining any previous sanction, secured the job of his son in Renusagar Thermal Project. After highlighting this issue by the respondent No.1, appellant company had issued a memorandum of charge to respondent no.1 on 13/15-04-2024 on the ground that the complaint made by the respondent was duly investigated by Central Vigilance Office of the appellant company and found to be false as the same was not supported by any documents and the appointment of the son of Mr. Ram Baboo Prasad was not in violation of the rules. The action of respondent No.1 to make a complaint directly to the higher authorities was treated as misconduct and a charge-sheet has been issued to respondent No.1.

6. It is brought on record before the writ court by respondent No.1 that in documents dated 12/13-10-2017 post facto permission/approval for the appointment of Mr. Abhishek Kumar son of Mr. Ram Baboo Prasad was granted meaning thereby, the allegation of securing the appointment of Mr. Abhishek Kumar without prior permission was correct. By the same order, a restriction was imposed upon Mr. Ram Baboo Prasad not to deal with M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd.. However, as per respondent no.1, he was continuously dealing with M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd. and regularly signing the documents.

7. The complaint of respondent No.1 was closed on the ground that no documentary evidence was submitted along with the complaint and Government of India, Ministry of Coal vide letter dated 28.02.2024 issued a direction to CVO, CCL to take departmental action against the respondent No.1 as per applicable rules for making the complaint and based upon the said instructions received by the authorities on 05.03.2024, a charge-sheet was issued to the respondent No.1 upon the allegations inter alia he acted prejudicial to the interest of the Company.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://mphc.gov.in/upload/jabalpur/MPHCJB/2025/WA/364/WA_364_2025_FinalOrder_13-11-2025_digi.pdf)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.