VIDYAPATIPRASADSINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the order of suspension dated 19th of April, 1994, as contained in Annexure-1 is under challenge. By amendment petition the petitioner has also challenged a letter dated 17th of November, 1995, as contained in Annexure-23, by which he has been intimated that one Shri S.M.I.F. Alam, Retired District and Sessions Judge has been appointed as an enquiry officer for conducting the departmental enquiry, with respect to him. The notice given by the enquiry officer- Retired District and Sessions Judge, dated 18th of November, 1995, as contained in Annexure-23/1 is also under challenge.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner is an employee of respondent-Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffar- pur (hereinafter referred to as the University'). He was functioning as Controller of Examinations, prior to the issuance of the order of suspension. The petitioner was placed under suspension by the impugned order dated 19th of April, 1994 (Annexure-1). Thereafter the respondents issued one charge-sheet on 25th of April, 1994 (Annexure-3) and constituted a 2-man Enquiry Committee by another order dated 25th of April, 1994 (Annexure-2) to hold departmental enquiry. Subsequently another charge-sheet (2nd charge-sheet) was issued by order dated 26th of May, 1994 (Annexure-4). The petitioner filed show cause vreply before the authorities/man enquiry committee and denied the allegations made by two different charge-sheets. Such show-cause replies were filed on 3rd of June, 1994 (Annexure-5) and 6th of June, 1994 (Annexure-6), respectively. According to the petitioner, without any rhyme or reason the 2- man enquiry committee constituted by order dated 25th of April, 1994 (Annexure-2) was superseded and another enquiry committee was constituted on 29th of October, 1994 (vide Annexure- 9), appointing one Dr. N.K.P. Sinha as convenor, along with others (2nd enquiry committee). The convenor of the subsequent enquiry committee, before whom the petitioner appeared on number of days. Another enquiry committee was constituted by the respondents vide memo dated 21st of July, 1995 (Annexure-10), of which Dr. K.K. Jha, Head of the Department of Botany was made Convernor along with others (3rd enquiry committee).

(3.) It is stated that the petitioner appeared before both the aforesaid enquiry committees headed by Dr. N.K.P. inha and Dr. K.K. Jha, respectively. the enquiry committee headed by Dr. N.K.P. Sinha has already submitted an enquiry report; whereas the other enquiry committee headed by Dr. K.K. Jha has not yet submitted its enquiry report. In spite of the same, when the respondents sat tight over the matter, the petitioner moved before this Court by filing the present writ-petition challenging the order of suspension dated 19th of April, 1994 (Annexure-1). During the pendency of the present writ-petition a retired District and Sessions Judge, namely, Shri S.M.I.F. Alam has been appointed as enquiry officer to conduct the enquiry relating to certain charges against the petitioner, which has been communicated vide letter dated 17th of November, 1995 (Annexure-23), the same has also been challenged in the present writ-petition by amendment petition. As stated above, notice issued by the said retired District and Sessions Judge dated 18th of November, 1995 (Annexure-23) is also under challenge.