RAM KUMAR CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner seeks a writ to quash the impugned order dated 14.09.2002 (Annexure P-5), whereunder, the petitioner was removed from the service under the provisions of Rule 10(9) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short "the Rules, 1996") and further, it was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.18,111/- for loss of 180.440 kg of copper wire, and impugned order dated 28.04.2006 (Annexure P-6), whereunder, the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by the High Court.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, as stated by the petitioner are that the petitioner was working as Junior Naib Nazir in Civil Court, Baikunthpur, District Koriya from 26.07.1997 to 05.02.2001. In criminal case No.58/1998, there was a direction to return the seized articles i.e. the copper wire of 270 kg to the accused persons namely Nasrudin and Ramesh ?Kumar Tamrakar. It was found that the copper wire returned was 180.400 kg. less out of 270 kg which was worth Rs.18,111/- . A departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner and a charge sheet was issued on April, 2001 alongwith articles of charges and list of witnesses. THE petitioner submitted his reply on 02.05.2001 (Annexure P-3). THE Civil Judge Class-II Baikunthpur was appointed as Enquiry Officer. THE enquiry report was submitted on 06.07.2002 (Annexure P-4) holding that the charge of not returning back the total copper wire of 270 kg and missing of 180.400 kg. was proved. It was further held that the petitioner was arrested at 18:40 O'clock on 06.02.2001 and remained in custody till 18:40 O'clock on 08.02.2011. Thus, he spent more than 48 hours in the custody. In the enquiry, it was further observed that for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 197 of Indian Penal Code by the police before arrest of the delinquent employee, the prosecution has failed to establish the case.

(3.) IT is also contended that the procedure as laid down for holding the enquiry is fully vitiated. The appeal has also? been dismissed in a mechanical manner. Proper opportunity of defence has not been afforded to the petitioner. The petitioner did not know about the total weight of the copper wire, as the same was not weighed before it was deposited in the Nazarat. The petitioner has made serious allegation of personal grudge and malafide against the Enquiry Officer, which was also not examined and considered. The seized article was produced by the concerned Police Station after lapse of more than two years from the date of seizure. Thus, the quantity of copper wire was not reliable. IT is also contended that the inquest of the article was not been produced in the departmental enquiry. The Reader, D.L.Dewangan, being the most relevant person, ought to have been examined in the enquiry proceeding. The same was not done and the two other witnesses were also not examined.