SHAMBHU NATH CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State,

(2.) A Counter affidavit as also a supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. The court proceeds to dispose -off this application at the stage of admission itself. The petitioner questions the order dated 10.9.1999 as contained at Annexure 11. The impugned order would terminate the services of the petitioner recording that in an enquiry the appointment of the petitioner would have been found to be irregular. The communication would then go on to add that the petitioner had joined the government service on a forged appointment letter which would be a case of fraud and deceit for which a First Information Report was required to be lodged also.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner makes a grievance that in pursuance of this order nothing further happened after he submitted his papers as required by the respondents by their letter dated 27.7.1999. The petitioner was never noticed for any enquiry, he was never communicated any dates for the same. He was not furnished with any material on the basis of which any purported enquiry was held and findings arrived at. No enquiry report was made available to him. The final order dated 10.9.1999 terminating his services came to be passed straightaway, which also would be non - speaking in nature.