BASUDEO PRASAD ASHOKA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Basudeo Prasad Ashoka, a Class IV employee with the Bihar State Transport Department posted at the District Transport, Bhagalpur, filed a writ petition resisting the action of the disciplinary authority in ordering a disciplinary inquiry de novo. The disciplinary authority was of the view that the inquiry officer had wrapped up the inquiry only on the explanation of the petitioner. A re-inquiry was ordered. Against this the petitioner filed the writ petition (CWJC. No. 9669 of 2002, Basudeo Prasad Ashoka v. State of Bihar and Ors.). The learned Judge declined to quash the order on the writ petition by which an inquiry had been ordered de novo. Against the order of the learned Judge dated September 4, 2002, the present letters patent appeal has been filed.

(2.) The allegations against the petitioner are of forgery and misappropriation. The contentions before the Court on this Letters Patent Appeal are two fold, firstly, there was no occasion to order a re-inquiry as there was no witness and the explanation of the petitioner was sufficient material on record to close the inquiry and secondly, if the department intends to file a First Information Report the Court should stall this exercise for at least two months.

(3.) In so far as the second submission is concerned, there is no limitation against crime. In the circumstances, if the department proposes to file a First Information Report then this should have been done a long time ago. In a case like the present one and the record which the petitioner himself has produced it is strange that a complaint had not been filed against all those persons who were embroiled in this connection in concert with allegations of forgery and misappropriation.