NARENDRAPRASADSINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition the petitioner has impugned the order Annexure-1 dated 23-6-1988, whereby he has been directed not to come for work with effect from 25th of June 1988. The impugned order proceeds on the basis that the petitioner has been found guilty of forgery and fabrication and therefore has to be removed from service.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner was working on daily wages under the respondent Corporation. It appears that the petitioner was one of the applicants for for the post of supervisor in the Corporation. He had made an application for consideration of his case for appointment and he had also forwarded a letter to the Chairman of tbe Bureau of Public Enterprises. Department of the Finance, Patna, That letter has been produced as Annexure-B. He enclosed therewith the office order of the respondent Corporation dated 19-4-1986 in which a liss of petson was given who had been provided certain duties, and towards the end of that order it was stated that if their work was found satisfactory their cases will be considered for regularisation. It appears tbat this last part of the order was suspected to be an interpolation.

(3.) By Annexure-12 dated 16-5-1988, the Managing Director of the respondent Corporation asked the petitioner to submit the original of the office order of which he had submitted to the Bureau of Public Enterprises. In reply to the aforesaid letter, the petitioner wrote to the Managing Director stating that he had merely submitted & photo copy of the office order and that the original order must be in the office of the Corporation. Ho suspected that some manipulation may be done with a view to darken the further of the petitioner. Thereafter by the impugned order Annexure-1 services of the petitioner have been terminated, and he was directed sot to come for duty from 25-6-1988.