ABDUL RAZZAK AHMED Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. K. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Konwar, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, and Ms. M. Kataky, learned Standing counsel, Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned orders dt. 19/12/1997, 24/9/2014 and further seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to release the petitioner's all retiral benefits, such as pension, gratuity, etc. including arrear pension.

(3.) The facts, as can be discerned from the pleadings on record, show that the petitioner herein, while serving as Assistant Director, Headquarter, Dairy Development Department, Assam, was suspended vide notification dtd. 26/11/1992 pending drawal of departmental proceedings. Thereupon, a preliminary enquiry was conducted by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Veterinary Department, and a report was submitted on 16/11/1992 holding that the petitioner was negligent towards his duty, and proposing departmental enquiry against him including others for defalcation of certain public money. The petitioner thereupon challenged the said notification dtd. 26/11/1992 by filing a writ petition before this Court, which was registered as Civil Rule No. 639/1992. This Court, by an order dtd. 7/12/1992 stayed the said suspension order with further direction to the petitioner to file appeal before the competent authority. In pursuance thereto, vide another notification dtd. 11/12/1992, the Government suspended the earlier notification dtd. 26/11/1992. The petitioner thereupon submitted an appeal before the competent authority for revocation of the notification placing him under suspension. On 8/1/1993, a notification was issued by the Additional Secretary to the Government of Assam, Veterinary Department, disclosing consideration of the appeal submitted by the petitioner and upheld the notification dtd. 26/11/1992 placing the petitioner under suspension pending drawal of departmental proceedings. Thereupon, on 30/1/1993, a Charge Memo was issued to petitioner asking him to show cause inter alia against the charge of defalcation of Rs.6,28,450.00 relating to Town Milk Supply Scheme. At this stage, this Court finds it pertinent to quote herein-below the statement of allegation so made against the petitioner in the Charge Memo dtd. 30/1/1993: