BACHCHAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though technically separate proceedings were held against the four petitioners and separate orders were passed, but they have joined together in this writ application challenging the orders jointly as, except for the names, all the orders are apparently identical. In fact the orders and notices show that on a common format only the names of the petitioners were changed.

(2.) Initially the petitioners filed this writ application challenging their suspension orders dated 9.1.1996 annexed as Annexures-1, 1/A, 1/B and 1/C respectively, and to direct the respondents to pay them all arrears as well as current salary and allowances. However, soon after the filing of the writ application proceedings against them were concluded and orders of their dismissal were passed. Hence, they filed I.A. No.166/98, brining the said orders on record and praying for amendment in the prayer portion of the writ application by adding the prayer for quashing of the orders of their dismissal also, brought on record as Annexures-18, 18/1, 18/2 and 18/3, respectively. On the grounds mentioned in the I.A., by order dated 14.1.1998 passed by a Bench of this Court, the I.A was allowed.

(3.) Short facts of the case are that at the relevant time the four petitioners were working as Accounts Clerk, Treasure Guard and Chainman under the Chief Engineer, Water Resource Department, Motihari. They were respectively, President, Vice-President, Organizational Secretary and Vice-President of District Unit of Bihar State Non-Gazetted Employees Federation (Gope Gut) of the Motihari District. It is stated that the application of many of the employees of the Department at Motihari for temporary advance from their GPF account was pending with the Superintending Engineer, Design & Quality Control Circle, Motihari since long. Applications were submitted by the employees due to their dire necessity of money for marriage of their dependents, illness etc. etc. Since the same were not being processed and advance was not being ordered to be released, petitioners, along with some other employees, went in a delegation to meet the Superintending Engineer for redressal of their grievances and for expeditious disposal of the applications. There some incident happened which the District President of the Federation reported to the Chief Engineer through his letter of the same day, vide Annexure- 2, with a request to make proper enquiry and take appropriate steps to prevent such incidents in future. However, it appears that the Superintending Engineer also reported the matter to the higher authorities, in the light of which, orders of suspension of petitioners were issued on 9.1.1996, vide Annexure-1 and the headquarters of the petitioners were fixed at Hazaribagh and Chaibasa respectively. Later on, vide Annexure-3 series, resolutions were issued placing the petitioners under departmental proceedings and charge memos were issued to them. One Yadunath Singh, Superintending Engineer, Waterways Division, Ranchi, was appointed as Conducting Officer before whom petitioners were directed to submit their written statement. One Dhirendra Kumar Singh, Technical Advisor of the same Division was appointed as Coordinating Officer. With the resolution a copy of the letter no.50 dated 6.1.1996 of the Chief Engineer in five pages was cited as evidence and said to have been enclosed. The Conducting Officer was requested to conclude the proceeding within two months.