SATYADEO CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application prayer of the petitioner is to quash the order dated 24.3.2001 (Annexure -1) whereby the petitioner has been awarded the punishment of stoppage of promotion for five years as well as for recovery of Rs. two lacs from his salary.

(2.) SHORN of unnecessary details, facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner was working as Assistant Engineer during the relevant time. By order dated 2.4.1997 his promotion for five years was withheld and a directior was issued for recovery of a sum of Rs two lacs from his salary. Aggrieved by the same he preferred C.W.J.C. No. 10264. of 1997 before this Court and by order dated 12.8.1999 said order was quashed and liberty was given to the respondents to serve a copy of charge to the petitioner and after consideration of the show cause to pass order in accordance with law. After the disposal of the aforesaid writ application by order dated 28.9.1999 (Annexure -13) memo of charges was served upon the petitioner, and petitioner was asked to file his show cause. According to the charge, while the petitioner was posted as Assistant Engineer (Mechanical), Flood Control Division, Samastipur in the year 1991, on the basis of forged letters of the Executive Engineer dated 1.2.1990 and 3.2.1990 purportedly for supply of iron rods of 10 mm and 12 mm, he directed for supply of iron rods of 16 mm diameter and accordingly 80 metric tonnes of iron rods were delivered between 6.2.1990 to 2.4.1990. According to the memo of charges, petitioner did not verify the authenticity of the letters of the Executive Engineer and although the requisition was made for supply of 10 mm and 12 mm diameter, he made order for supply of iron rods of 16 mm diameter but before that he did not seek the approval of the Superintending Engineer. According to the charge, petitioner was the incharge of the stores and before disbursing the iron rods it was incumbent upon him to verify the requisition but without doing so, delivery of iron rods clearly shows misappropriation of 80. metric tonnes of iron rods under a planned conspiracy. It is relevant here to state that before framing of the charge an enquiry was held and a report was submitted.

(3.) THE State Government on consideration of the allegation made against the petitioner found that he had issued 80 metric tonnes of iron rods on the basis of the forged requisition of the Executive Engineer and the same was done without verifying its authenticity. It further observed that although the requisition was for iron rods of 10/12 mm diameter but the petitioner had made delivery of iron rods of 16 mm diameter. Petitioner was accordingly found guilty for causing pecuniary loss to the Government and by the impugned order the punishment for withholding of promotion for five years and recovery of a sum of Rs. two lacs from his salary was passed.