RAMANAND CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application has been filed by the petitioner for quashing a communication, dated the 10th December, 1974, issued by the State Government to the Administrator, District Board. Purnea, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Administrator'), asking the latter to suspend the petitioner and start a departmental proceeding against him, a copy whereof is Annexure "10" to the writ application introduced by an application filed by the petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure: and for quashing a letter, dated the 23rd December, 1974, issued by the Administrator containing an order of suspension passed by him against the petitioner, a copy of which is Annexure "11" to the writ application.

(2.) According to the case of the petitioner, he was appointed as a lower division clerk in the office of the District Board. Purnea, with effect from the 5th August, 1953, and, having performed his duties satisfactorily, he was appointed as Head Clerk-cum-Accountant in the year 1971. In accordance with the practice obtaining in the office of the District Board, service books of the employees are maintained and kept in the custody of the Accountant, A supplementary service book of the petitioner in continuation of the original service book, was started in the year 1966. The petitioner has stated in the writ application that one P.N. Das, the then Accountant, from whom the petitioner took over charge, asked him to put his date of birth on the first page of the supplementary service book and the petitioner entered "31-1-1936" as the date of his birth, as he was told by P.N. Das that that was the date of his birth which had been entered in the original service book. Later, it transpired that there had been overwriting on the date of birth of the petitioner in the original service book where the date of birth of the petitioner was changed from "31-1-1931" to "31-1-1936", after making interpolation. An enquiry was instituted in respect of the said interpolation in the date of birth of the petitioner in the service book. In that connection the District Engineer, District Board. Purnea, called upon the petitioner to explain in respect of certain charges contained in a letter, dated the 14th September. 1971, a copy whereof is Annexure "2" to the writ application,

(3.) In the said show cause notice issued by the District Engineer, charge No. 3 was in respect of interpolation made in the service book of the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his explanation saving that the said interpolation had been made by P. N. Das in order to harass the petitioner. A copy of the said explanation is Annexure "3" to the writ application. The District Engineer, in due course, sent the file to the respondent Administrator, who, on a perusal of the explanation submitted on behalf of the petitioner, by his order, dated the 23rd December, 1971, observed in respect of charge No. 3 "It is very difficult to prove as to who has actually overwritten unless the whole matter is sent to handwriting expert. Hence this charge also falls flat and has got no legs to stand upon." In that very order the Administrator stated that he had called for the original Matriculation certificate from the petitioner and he had corrected the interpolated date of birth by altering 31st January. 1936 into 31st January. 1931. A copy of the said order is Annexure "4" to the writ application.