LOLIN BASKI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is a constable who has been dismissed from service after holding a departmental enquiry and on a finding of guilt recorded by the enquiry officer. The charges were drawn up against the petitioner which included not only misbehaviour with certain passengers and traders at Naugachhia Railway Station but misbehaviour with woman folk, details thereof would be evident from not only the charges but the narration and details, given both by disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority.

(2.) Learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner raised certain questions of law relating to procedural infirmity in the departmental proceeding conducted against the petitioner. His first submission was that the delinquent was not given opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses produced in the enquiry. He was not given copy of the enquiry report to effectively defend himself and only extract of the finding was furnished to him and this lead to miscarriage of justice.

(3.) Since the counter affidavit did not answer some of these questions in so many words, the Court directed the State counsel to produce the original file relating to disciplinary proceeding to verify the actual state of affairs and the manner in which the departmental proceeding was conducted by the enquiry officer as such.