JAMIL AHMAD KHAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, Counsel for the State and also Counsel for the Respondent No. 7.

(2.) The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 4-1-1999 contained in Annexure-6 bearing Officer Order No. 22/99 has come to this Court inter alia submitting that the Deputy inspector General of Police (Vigilance), Electricity Council, Patna has no jurisdiction or authority to direct the petitioner to pay Rs: 2,000 as maintenance to the private respondent No. 7, Husne Aara Khatoon. It is contended that deduction of the said amount from the said salary to be paid to the Respondent No. 7 is patently illegal and cannot be protected under any provisions of law.

(3.) The facts in nutshell are that Smt. Husne Aara Khatoon made an application to the Department that during sustenance of his marriage, with the presentpetitioner he contracted second marriage and has deserted Husne Aara Khatoon and her children. On the said application, an enquiry was initiated and thereafter a finding was recorded against the interest of the present petitioner.