DAYA BRAJESHWAR DAYA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application has been filed for following reliefs:-

(2.) Short facts of the case, as mentioned in the writ application, are that vide Memo No. 368(17) dtd. 30/4/2010, a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner due to gross negligence, defiance of the order of the government and remained unauthorisedly absent from duty without permission of the authority concerned. Despite all efforts made for participation in the departmental proceeding, neither petitioner appeared before the conducting officer nor submitted his reply to the charges. The Enquiry Officer found the charges against the petitioner proved, and accordingly, he submitted his enquiry report. Thereafter, another press communique was published on 31/12/2011 in a daily Hindi newspaper "Rashtriya Sahara" wherein petitioner was asked to submit his reply / application within 15 days from the date of its publication. In compliance of the aforesaid press communique, petitioner submitted his representation dtd. 28/1/2012. Thereafter, Health Department issued a letter to the petitioner at his new address, bearing letter no. 253(17) dtd. 17/2/2012, whereby second opportunity was given to him to represent himself before the authority concerned and submit his reply to the second show cause within one week, but the petitioner failed to submit his reply to the second show cause within stipulated period and as a result, the department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, vide letter no. 587(17) dtd. 25/4/2012 (Annexure "J" to the counter affidavit) sent the proposal of punishment of dismissal from service to the BPSC, Patna, which was approved by the BPSC, vide letter no. 1237 dtd. 29/8/2012 (Annexure "K" to the counter affidavit) and accordingly, the petitioner dismissed from service, vide resolution of the Health Department, Government of Bihar, (Annexure-1 to the writ application) due to unauthorisedly absence from duty for more than five years on the Board's charges under Rules 14, 17 and 18 of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "C.C.A. Rules").

(3.) It is contention of the petitioner that the order of punishment of dismissal from service has been passed without considering the 2nd show cause reply of the petitioner. Impugned order is violative of principle of nature justice and against the statutory provisions, as contained in Rule 18(3) and (4) of the C.C.A. Rules.