BINOD KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Amaresh Kumar Singh for the petitioner, and Mr. Marut Nath Roy, learned junior counsel to Standing Counsel No. XI. This writ petition relates to disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner challenges the order of dismissal, the appellate order, and the revisional order, and are as follows:

(2.) THE respondents have placed on record their counter affidavit and have supported the impugned action.

(3.) WHILE assailing the validity of the impugned action, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge -sheet was confined to unauthorised absence for three days, whereas the enquiry report as well as the order of the disciplinary authority cover a much longer period of absence. The charge -sheet is, therefore, vague. He relies on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sawai Singh V/s. State of Rajasthan, reported in AIR 1986 SC 995, Paragraph -15. He further submits that he was not afforded reasonable opportunity of hearing at any stage and, therefore, the proceedings from the stage of enquiry till the revisional stage are in violation of the basic principles of natural justice. He relies on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ram Chander V/s. Union of India and Others, reported in AIR 1986 SC 1173, paragraph -22. He next submits that notices of the enquiry proceedings were never served on him. He lastly submits that he was never paid subsistence allowance which vitiates the entire departmental proceeding. He relies on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra V/s. Chandrabhan, reported in AIR 1983 SC 803, paragraph -23. He has lastly submitted that the punishment is disproportionate to the gravity of the charges proved against him. He relies on the unreported order dated 29.11.2006, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3879 of 2005.