LAWS(PAT)-1996-1-23

YOGENDRA NARAIN SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On January 30, 1996
YOGENDRA NARAIN SAH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this application seeks to challenge the orders dismissing him from service for certain misconduct including long unauthorised absence from duty.

(2.) ON 15 -1 -1961 the petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Clerk in the Office of 17, Bihar Battalion N. C. C. Saharsa. Being surplus staff in that department his services were transferred to the Directorate, adult Education, Bihar and he was posted in the office of the Project Officer, Harsidhi block, East Champaran vide order contained in the letter dated 26 -2 -1979 issued by the Director, Adult Education. The petitioner was relieved from the n. C. C. Office on March 16, 1979 and thereafter he joined in the office of the project Officer, Harsidhi Block, East champaran. Shortly after having joined there he went away without any sanctioned leave on 12 -5 -1979 and appears to have remained absent till the issuance of the charge sheet dated May 28, 1983 (Copy at Annexure -1 ). A departmental enquiry was held into the charges at the conclusion of which he was given a second show cause and after considering his reply to it he was dismissed from service by order dated september 30, 1983 (Annexure -5)passed by the Director, Adult Education, Bihar, Patna. He preferred an appeal against this order which was dismissed by the Education Commissioner, Bihar, Patna by order dated april 4,1985 (Annexure -7 ).

(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the writ petition, I find no infirmity in the impugned orders and I am of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case the impugned orders were passed quite properly. However, the long pendency of this case before this court has given rise to a situation which warrants a further consideration of the petitioners case. It may be noted that this application was admitted for hearing in this court on 4 -10 -1985 when by an interim order the operation of the impugned orders contained in Annexures 5 and 7 was stayed. As a consequence the petitioner would be deemed to continue in service.