LAWS(PAT)-2024-1-120

RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On January 29, 2024
RAJESH KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Governor's Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.

(2.) Learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed for quashing of the order contained in Memo No. 574 dtd. 13/4/2018, communicated by respondent No.3 by which the petitioner has been made compulsorily retired.

(3.) Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner was initially appointed on a daily wage basis followed by a procedure of regular appointment vide order No. Estb.88/90-3193/GS(3) dtd. 27/11/1991. Subsequently, vide order dtd. 5/6/1995 issued under the signature of respondent No.2, namely, the Principal Secretary, Governor's Secretariat, Bihar, Patna, the petitioner was appointed on the regular vacant post of Personal Assistant. The services of the petitioner were confirmed w.e.f. 5/6/1998 vide Memo No. Estb.15/95-1244/GS(3) dtd. 16/5/2000. He further submits that in the year 2004, he was promoted to the post of Sr. Personal Assistant, vide Governor's Secretariat Office Order No. Estb.88/90-3322/GS(3), dtd. 9/12/2004 and, thereafter, vide Memo No. 2437 dtd. 7/5/2007, the petitioner was designated as Private Secretary. The petitioner was suspended vide Memo No. 515 dtd. 3/4/2018 on the basis of an allegation that he leaked certain confidential documents from the office of the Governor's Secretariat. Subsequently, vide Memo No. 574 dtd. 13/4/2018, he was terminated from the service under Rule 74 of the Bihar Service Code, 1952 granting three months' salary and benefits as well as making him entitled for pension, gratuity, and other retiral benefits in accordance with law. Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order contained in Annexure-7 has been passed in complete violation of law due to the reason that the said letter by which the petitioner has been compulsorily retired is basically a stigma on him without initiation of any departmental proceeding which is in gross violation of the constitution.