GULAM KAMRUDDIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sanjay Singh, S.C. 9 for the State of Bihar.

(2.) PETITIONER , who substantially held the post of Clerk/Assistant and was a record keeper at the relevant time in the office of the District Sub -Registrar, Saran at Chapra, has filed this application assailing the order bearing memo No. 2724 dated 21.11.2003, annexure -5, whereunder his pension has been reduced to nil in consideration of the report of the enquiry officer whereafter notice bearing memo No. 2281 dated 26.9.2003, annexure -3, was served on him and he submitted his reply thereto dated 19.10.2003, annexure -4, in consideration whereof impugned order dated 1.11.2003 was passed. Petitioner has assailed the aforesaid order dated 21.11.2003, annexure -5, on the ground that the said order has been passed ignoring the minutes of theenquiry officer recorded under proceedings dated 4.1.2003/30.1.2003, annexure -2, wherefrom it appears that the enquiry officer was not in a position to proceed with the enquiry as the relevant records on the basis of which charges have been set out against the petitioner are in custody of the police authorities/ submitted before the court in which the trial is pending against the petitioner.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner states that, no doubt, the charges were served on the petitioner under letter dated 1.11.2000 but the documents on the basis of which those charges were framed were never served and that is why enquiry officer in his minutes dated 30.1.2003 recorded that it is not possible to conclude that the petitioner is responsible for the interpolation as the documents were never produced before him. He further submitted that Md. Usman from whose house at Siwan interpolated documents were seized was also not examined in support of the charge.