SUDHIR KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Rajeeva Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.N.Roy, learned AC to SC-25 for the State and other official respondents. This writ application has been filed challenging the office order issued vide Memo No. 327 dated 3.4.2002 (Annexure-2) passed by the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, whereby two punishments, namely, (a) stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect and (b) entry of censure in the petitioner s service book for the year 1998-99 has been ordered to be made. The order of the Appellate authority dated 24.10.2002 whereby the original order of punishment has been modified to the extent of stoppage of two increments with non-cumulative effect, the other punishment remained intact. Both the orders contemplate that the petitioner will not be entitled for any salary or allowance over and above subsistence allowance which the petitioner received during the period of suspension.

(2.) While posted as Assistant, Senior Selection Grade, in the Office of the Director General of Police, Bihar, the petitioner was put under suspension by an order issued vide memo no. 995 dated 15.9.2000 (Annexure-10) in contemplation of a departmental proceeding on the ground that he did not obey the transfer orders after he was promoted to the rank of Section Officer in Road Construction Department and subsequently in the office of Divisional Commissioner, Purnea. Subsequently, vide resolution issued vide memo no. 767 dated 24.7.2001 (Annexure-13) a disciplinary proceeding was initiated with the issuance of charge-sheet by the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Bihar. It was proposed to adopt the proceeding for imposing major punishment on the petitioner as would appear from paragraph 2 of the resolution dated 24.7.2001. Mr. C.K. Anil, Additional Secretary, Health Department was appointed as Conducting Officer. As per the said resolution the petitioner was required to file his written statement of defence within two weeks from the date of receipt of charge-sheet. Accordingly he filed his written statement of defence on 17.8.2001 before the enquiry officer. He also filed a supplementary written statement of defence on 4.9.2001.

(3.) The specific plea of the petitioner is that he was never informed by the Inquiry Officer about the date of enquiry or was called upon to appear before the Inquiry Officer to avail personal hearing. As the petitioner was aggrieved by prolonged suspension, he had approached this Court by filing CWJC No.8343 of 2001 against the order of suspension. On 3.4.2002, till the case was taken up, the petitioner had no information about any action either by the Conducting Officer or by the Disciplinary authority in the said proceeding initiated against him. It was only by way of counter affidavit filed in that case (CWJC No. 8343 of 2001) on 18.4.2002 that the petitioner learnt that the said order dated 3.4.2002 (Annexure-2) had been passed imposing punishment on him on the basis of the report of Inquiry Officer. It is the specific case of the petitioner in paragraphs 26 to 32 of the present writ application that the petitioner had absolutely no knowledge with regard to the progress of the inquiry or the manner in which the same was conducted by Sri C.K.Anil, the then Additional Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar.