SURYA NATH PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. A supplementary counter affidavit has been filed in pursuance of the order dated 20.7.2004 by this Court.

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 27.8.2001 contained in Memo No. 873 at annexure -9. By the said order the petitioner has been imposed two punishments (a) break in service for the period 10.6.2000 to 2.8.2000 and (b) he would not be entitled to any payment during suspension period except the subsistance allowance.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that though a formal departmental proceeding was drawn up against him and memo of charges were served, the respondents did not in fact held any regular departmental proceedings giving the petitioner an opportunity to present his defence. No documents were supplied to the petitioner or placed before the Enquiry Officer, neither any witnesses were examined by the Enquiry Officer with opportunity to the petitioner to cross -examine them. Based upon such an enquiry contrary to law an ex -parte enquiry report came to be submitted. The petitioner was never furnished any second show cause notice along with enquiry report with regard to the punishment proposed to be meeted out to him.