ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Bihar Public Service Commission.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 10/8/2015 contained in Memo no.1770 (annexed as Annexure-9), order dtd. 12/1/2016 contained in Memo No.75 (annexed as Annexure-11) and order dtd. 10/8/2016 contained in Memo no.1727 (annexed as Annexure-12); all the orders issued by the concerned authorities under the Water Resources Department of the State Government.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the punishment order has been passed against the petitioner is absolutely in violation of law due to the reason that there are gross irregularity made reaching on the conclusion by the Disciplinary Authority. Counsel also submits that in the second show cause which is annexed as Annexure-6 is absolutely defective due to the reason that the Disciplinary Authority has found the charges proved against the petitioner, whereas, the Enquiry Officer has categorically given its finding that charge has not been proved. Counsel further submits that the said finding on the second show cause has been issued in complete violation of Rule 18(2) of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'CCA Rules, 2005').