MADAN MURARI SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner in this application who was an Under Secretary in the Bihar State Electricity Board ('the Board' for short), has been given the punishment of compulsory retirement following a disciplinary proceeding on certain charges of gross misconduct against him. Although the order under challenge is shown to have been issued by order of the Board vide resolution dated 20.8.92 (copy at Annexure 6), it is an admitted position that the order of compulsory retirement was passed by the Chairman of the-Board. In para 18 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondents 2 to 4, it is unequivocably stated that the impugned order of compulsory retirement was passed by the Chairman of the Board.

(2.) Dr. S.N. Jha, learned Counsel for the Petitioner assails the impugned order on two grounds; first, that the order of punishment was unsustainable in law for the reason that it was passed without furnishing a copy of the enquiry report to the Petitioner as required in view of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Union of India V/s. Md. Ramzan Khan, 1991 AIR(SC) 471. He secondly contended that in case of the Petitioner the competent authority to impose a punishment amounting to removal from service was the Board, and the Chairman had no authority to pass such an order.

(3.) Mr. Shivendra Kishore, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents candidly admitted that no copy of the enquiry report was furnished to the Petitioner and agreed that in view of the Supreme Court decision, the matter had to go back to the disciplinary authority for a reconsideration from that stage.