SANJAY KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 9/2/2016 passed in Service Appeal No. 211 of 2015 by the Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected, as contained in Annexure-9 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also sought quashing of the order dtd. 27/8/2015 issued under Memo No. 463 by the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service with effect from the date of issuance of the said order, as contained in Annexure-7 to the writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any misconduct. It is further submitted that a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, which was conducted without the appointment of a Presenting Officer. In the absence of a Presenting Officer, it is contended, the entire disciplinary proceeding, including the final order of punishment, stands vitiated. It is also submitted that a copy of the enquiry report was not supplied to the petitioner along with the second show cause notice.