CHANDESHWAR PRASAD YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order of punishment dated 31.07.2011 bearing memo no. 3176 issued by respondent no. 5 (Annexure-15) and consequential appellate order dated 02.11.2011 bearing memo No. 1286 issued by respondent no.4 (Annexure-17 series) whereby a punishment of stoppage of increment for six months equivalent to one black dot and punishment of non-payment of amount during the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance have been imposed upon him pursuant to departmental proceeding and the period of suspension has been directed to be adjusted against earned leave of the petitioner; and for consequential reliefs.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a short submission to assail the order of punishment and the appellate order, to the effect that the Enquiry Officer himself has played the role of the Presenting Officer by taking evidence of the witnesses as well as rendering his opinion regarding guilt of the petitioner in relation to the charges, as evident from the impugned orders as well as the enquiry report (Annexure-E to the counter affidavit). It is submitted that this completely vitiates the proceeding in view of the observations of this Court in Panchanan Kumar v. The Bihar State Electricity Board and ors., 1996(1) PLJR 401 which are as follows:-