RAJENDRA SINGH Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for issuance of an appropriate writ for quashing the order dated 25.7.2001 whereby the petitioner has been awarded punishment of reduction of 10% of pension under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules.

(2.) IN view of the order which I propose to pass in this writ application, it is inexpedient to give in detail the facts of the case. Suffice it to say that while the petitioner was working as Upper Division Clerk in the Bihar State Electricity Board, he was put under suspension and a departmental inquiry was initiated against him. Lateron, the order of suspension was revoked but the departmental proceeding continued. During the pendency of the departmental inquiry, petitioner retired but the proceeding continued. The Enquiry Officer exonerated him of all the charges. When the report of the Enquiry Officer was placed for consideration before the disciplinary authority, it disagreed with the same and while doing so, assigned various reasons and ultimately gave notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why 10% of the pension be not withheld in exercise of the power under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules. Petitioner submitted his reply and on consideration of the same, by the impugned order dated 25.7.2001 (Annexure -7), the punishment of withholding of 10% of pension has been passed. It is common ground that the Enquiry Officer had exonerated the petitioner from, the charges and the disciplinary authority while issuing notice against the proposed punishment, assigned reasons for disagreement with the finding of the Enquiry Officer but has given opportunity to the petitioner to show cause only against the punishment and on consideration thereof, the impugned order has been passed.

(3.) MR . Mihir Kumar Jha, appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that in view of the judgment of this court dated 28.4.2003 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2322 of 2003 (Jagdish Lall V/s. The Bihar State Electricity Board & ors.), it is difficult for him to persuade this court to take a contrary view. In the case of Jagdish Lall (supra), on review of the judgments of the Supreme Court and this Court; it has been heid as follows: "Undisputedly, petitioner was not given an opportunity to satisfy the disciplinary authority that the finding recorded by the Enquiry Officer is just and proper but has been given show cause notice against the proposed punishment only, which renders his order illegal in the eye of law."