KANHAIYA RAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing of order dated 29.6.98 contained in Annexure -6, whereby District Superintendent of Education, Kaimur (Bhabhua) has communicated to the petitioner that District Education Establishment Committee, Kaimur in its meeting dated 12.6.98 has decided to impose upon the petitioner, a Teacher of Primary School, Umapur Bhagwanpur, under suspension, the punishment of stoppage of one annual increment with cumulative effect. At the same time, petitioner was ordered to be released from suspension and it was ordered that for the suspension period he would be entitled for no salary beyond subsistence allowance.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in context of other service rules there are decisions to the effect that withholding of annual increment with cumulative effect is a major punishment and hence it was all the more necessary for the respondents to supply a copy of enquiry report to the petitioner before passing order of punishment. Learned counsel for the State has controverted this submission by producing before this court a copy of Bihar State Nationalised Primary School Teachers (Transfer and Disciplinary Proceeding) Rules, 1994 to show that according to Rule 8 of the Rules which govern cases of Teachers like the petitioners, clearly describes such punishment to be a minor one. Once the applicable rules categorise a punishment as major or minor, there is no scope to decide otherwise. Decision in respect of other rules will not apply to this case. However, it has been fairly submitted by learned counsel for the State that since 2002, Rule 8 has been amended and punishment of stoppage of increment with cumulative effect is no longer in list of minor punishments.