SONU KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Kumar Kaushik, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Anil Kumar, learned SC-8 for the State and Mr. Sanjay Pandey, learned counsel along with Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the Bihar Police Subordinate Service Commission.

(2.) The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ petition has sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter:-

(3.) An advertisement bearing Advertisement No. 01 of 2017 was published on 16/9/2017 by the Bihar Police Subordinate Service Commission for appointment against 1717 vacancies of Police Sub-Inspector in the Grade Pay of Rs.4200.00. The petitioner being eligible in the terms of the advertisement, filled up his online application form on 11/4/2017. A criminal case was pending against him relating to Samastipur Mufassil P.S. Case No. 291 of 2015 and the information regarding same has not been given in on-line application form. The petitioner had replied that due to inadvertence on the part of the cyber cafe, criminal case was not mentioned. Preliminary test was conducted on 11/3/2018 and the result of the preliminary examination was published by the Commission on 5/5/2018 in which the petitioner was found successful. The Main examination was conducted on 22/7/2018. The result of main examination was declared on 6/8/2018 in which the petitioner was found successful. Physical Test was conducted from 18/9/2018 to 29/9/2018. The result of Physical Eligibility Test was declared on 9/3/2019 in which the petitioner became successful. The petitioner was called for document verification. He was required to fill up a form under Rule 656 and 673 of Bihar Police Manual for character verification. In the prescribed Column No. 7, he has correctly given the detailed information regarding civil or criminal case by answering in affirmative and had disclosed that Samastipur Mufassil P.S. Case No. 291 of 2015 dtd. 21/9/2015, is pending against him. Thereafter, vide order dtd. 2/6/2019, the petitioner was posted at Benipatti Police Station in the District of Darbhanga. In respect of allegation that the petitioner had not disclosed criminal case in the on-line application form so filled by him, he was suspended on 14/4/2020 and was directed to submit his show cause within a period of 7 days. The show cause reply filed by the petitioner was found not convincing. A charge memo contained in Memo No. 326 dtd. 28/10/2021 was issued to the petitioner. An inquiry was conducted by the inquiry officer who had submitted his report vide Memo No. 3725 dtd. 17/11/2021 finding the charges to be true. It has been recorded in the finding that the petitioner had suppressed the information relating to pendency of criminal case against him in the on line application form filled at the time of its submission. A second show cause notice was issued vide Memo No. 2815 dtd. 31/12/2021. The petitioner filed his reply vide letter dtd. 1/2/2022 denying the findings of the Inquiry Officer and requested the Disciplinary Authority to make available certain documents so as to file his final show cause reply. In the meantime, learned Sessions Judge, Samastipur in Sessions Trial No. 103 of 2019 acquitted the petitioner vide order and judgment dtd. 7/5/2022. The petitioner vide letter dtd. 11/5/2022 requested the Disciplinary Authority to absolve him from the charges. The respondent Disciplinary Authority passed the order dtd. 27/6/2022, whereby and whereunder, the petitioner was dismissed from service. The petitioner filed an Appeal before the Appellate Authority which was rejected vide order dtd. 14/2/2023 contained in Memo No. 27 dtd. 20/2/2023. Aggrieved by the dismissal order and the appellate order, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.