SITA RAM PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has filed the present appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court against the order dated 27 -3 -2001 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWJC No. 3912 of 2001 dismissing the writ application filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 6 -2 -2001 (Annexure -5 to the writ application) passed by the Transport Commissioner, respondent No. 3 herein, dismissing him from service by taking recourse to the provision of Second proviso to Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE appellant was posted as Enforcement Sub -Inspector in the District of Gopalganj since 1996. On 12 -1 -2001, respondent No. 3 -Transport Commissioner, issued an order directing the appellant to join at headquarters at Patna within three days from the date of issuance of the order. The said order was served upon the appellant. On 15 -1 -2001, the appellant jointed in the department at Patna and on the following day, he proceeded on leave without the same being approved by the competent authority till 31 -1 -2001. On 18 -1 -2001 at 6.30 p.m. while the respondent No. 3 - Transport Commissioner, Sri N.K. Sinha was in the midst of holding a departmental meeting in his chamber along with Joint Transport Commissioner, Undersecretary, Registrar and other staff, an M. L.A. having been elected from Gopalganj constituency, namely, Sri Anirudh Prasad @ Sadhu Yadav along with two bodyguards armed with AK -47 rifles and 10 to 15 persons armed with fire - arms entered into his chamber and they took the office in ransom in the sense that they asked the other officers present in the meeting to leave the place by show of arms. The door of the chamber was closed and then at the gun point, the Transport Commissioner was forced to put his signature on the order purporting to be an order transferring back the appellant to Gopalganj after expiry of his leave on 31 -1 -2001. The mob led by the said M.L.A. also got an office order issued and said order was also served upon the person present there.

(3.) FROM perusal of Annexure -5 to the memo of appeal, it is evident that the respondent -Transport Commissioner has narrated the entire facts and also indicated the circumstances under which he was passing the order in exercise of power under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India.