SATISH CHANDRA KIRAN Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INITIALLY , the writ petition was filed for quashing Office Order No. 2064 dated 10 -5 -1999, which has later been brought on record as Annexure -B to the counter -affidavit, initiating departmental proceeding against the petitioner and also the second show -cause notice, contained in Resolution No. 1595 dated 30th June, 2000 (Annexure -8), issued relating to the said proceeding. Later, by filing an interlocutory application the petitioner has also prayed for quashing Resolution No. 2350 25. dated 11 -10 -2000 of the Board, which was brought on record as Annexure -A to the counter - affidavit awarding punishment forfeiting his pension and ordering for recovery of Rs. 1,97,937.00 from his admissible dues and directing that he shall not be paid anything other than the subsistence allowance received by him during the period of suspension.

(2.) IN short, the case of the petitioner is that he was posted as Account Assistant in the Officer of the Electric Supply Sub -Division, Dhaka under the Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as ';the Board), vide Office Order No. 493 dated 19 -4 -1989. On being transferred from there, he joined in the Office of the Electric Supply Division, Muzaffarpur (Urban), vide Office Order No. 711 dated 17 -11 - 1995. He was placed under suspension, vide Office Order No. 112 dated 12 -2 -1996 (Annexure -1) in contemplation of a departmental proceeding. Subsequently, a First Information Report was lodged on the basis of the written report submitted on 13 -2 - 1996. However, the petitioner ultimately retired from the service on 31 -5 -1998 till when he was not served with any charges in the departmental proceeding.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, later vide Office Order No, 2064 dated 10 -5 -1999, the departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner which he never received and could only know about it though the notice published in the daily newspaper "Aaz" on 26 -3 -2000, true copy of which has 15. been annexed as Annexure -3. However, in the meanwhile, he received Letter No. 268 dated 27 -1 - 2000 (Annexure -4) intimating him about the date of hearing on 6 -3 -2000 at 11 a.m., but without mentioning about the proceeding in which he had to appear for hearing. It may be mentioned here that earlier also a departmental proceeding was initiated against him and had not concluded till then. Notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner was busy with the treatment of his wife, who was bedridden, he sent an application addressed to the Director Departmental Proceeding -Cum - Enquiry Officer through his son on 2 -4 -2000. It is stated that his son appeared before the Enquiry Officer on 5 -4 -2000 at 11 a.m., but he declined to entertain the same. In support of this, a photo copy of the visitor ';s slip has been annexed as Annexure -5. Later, the application was sent through registered cover, a photo copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure 7. In the said application, he mentioned about the publication of notice in the "Aaz" and also that the said order dated 10 -5 -1999 was never received by him and that he had already superannuated from service on 31st May, 1998. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, a departmental proceeding is deemed to be instituted only when the charge framed against an employee is served before the retirement of the petitioner, which has not been complied in the present case and thus in the absence of compliance of the said requirement, the impugned resolution dated 30th June, 2000 (Annexure -8) passed after his retirement is ultra vires Rule 43 of the Bihar Pension Rules (hereinafter referred to as ';the Rules ';), which apply mutatis mutandis to the employees of the Board.