RAM HARE SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE court is not adverting to the merits of controversies lest it might prejudice the merits of the disciplinary proceeding. Suffice it to say that the petitioner -appellant along with others had been to the High Court earlier also. This was CWJC No. 5591 of 1995 : Ram Hare Singh & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. The administrative action is, to the effect, that the petitioner -appellant and others have been required under an order of penalty for recovery of the amount and stoppage of five annual increments.

(2.) THE contention in challenging the order on CWJC No. 1948 of 2003 : Ram Hare Singh V/s. The State of Bihar & Ors. is that the remedy of appeal in the Staff Regulation of the Bihar State Co -operative Bank Limited is not an adequate remedy. Firstly, it must be understood on record that the petitioner -appellant filed the writ petition (CWJC No. 1948 of 2003) alone. He was not joined by the other five who had filed the writ petition earlier. The court cannot permit him to challenge the vires of the rule because in his representation dated 5 December, 2002 (Annexure -3 to the writ petition) the petitioner was himself taking recourse to the rules. This very rule establishes the disciplinary procedure. The entire inquiry has taken place under this rule and the learned Judge has drawn the attention on record that rule 33(b) of the Regulation provides a clear cut alternate remedy of appeal on any order for redressal of grievances. In law, the petitioner -appellant is Shambhu Singh Versus State Of Bihar stopped from challenging the rule itself because the departmental inquiry was initiated more than 9 years ago.

(3.) THE court finds no error in the order on the writ petition.