MD SHAHABUDDIN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present writ application the Petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order of the Secretary of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Deoghar, as contained in Annexure-4, terminating his service as Security Guard in the Committee on account of his long absence, without any information as also the order of the appellate authority, passed on his appeal under Section 20 of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Market Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), a photo-copy whereof has been annexed as annexure 5.

(2.) In short, the relevant facts are that initially the Petitioner was appointed by the Market Committee, Biharshariff on daily wage on 11.9.1976 in which capacity he continued up to 30.9.1978. He was made regular on 1.10.1978 by the Market Committee, Biharshariff by resolution No. 70 dated 8.9.1978 and later, he was re-appointed by the Board on the post of Security Guard and was posted at Market Committee, Deoghar, vide letter No. 7912 dated 30.10.1980, a photo-copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 1. The Petitioner joined the said post of Security Guard on 24.11.1980. However, due to long absence he was dismissed from service by the Market Committee vide aforementioned order, contained in Annexure-4, which has been impugned in the present writ application. Later, he preferred an appeal bearing Appeal No. 1 of 1988 under Section 26 of the Act, which has been disallowed vide order, contained in Annexure-'5'.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has raised a very short question in this case. It has been contended that the Petitioner has been removed from service on the alleged ground of absence from duty without any information to the authority concerned, without initiating a departmental proceeding and/or giving a reasonable opportunity to defend. Further, it is contended that a regular employee cannot be removed from service on some charge without initiating a departmental proceeding and complying with the rules relating to the same. In this regard, the learned Counsel placed reliance on the provisions contained in Bihar and Orissa Subordinate Service Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1935 and has submitted that the said rule, which is applicable to the employees of the Agricultural Market Board, provides that no order of dismissal, removal, compulsory retirement or reduction shall be passed on a member of subordinate service unless he has been informed in writing the ground on which it is proposed to take action and he is afforded adequate opportunity of defending himself.