SHANKER SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application by Shree Sheo Shanker Siagh under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 11th of October, 1972 (Annexure 12) passed by the State of Bihar, through the Chief Administrator, River Valley Projects Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (respondent No. 1) removing the petitioner from the post of an Assistant Engineer in the said Project.

(2.) In order to appreciate the point involved in this application, it will be necessary to state material facts as to be found in the application filed by the petitioner and his other supplementary petitions and the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. The petitioner was initially appointed as an Assistant Engineer on 24th of November, 1966 and was posted at Tirhut Canal Sub-division, Sahebagnj, under the Gandak Project, Motihari Division. In 1965, a survey was made in the Mauza Ram pur Khurd, falling on the alignment of the Vaishali Canal of the Gandak Project and the said land was proposed to be acquired for the said purpose under the provision of the Land Acquisition Act, 1889. On 30th December, 1965, a surveyor of the Land Acquisition Department while surveying the land for acquisition prepared a Khasra, therein showed 1082 banana plants standing on the land. The Khasra register was found full of interpolations, cuttings and erasing by the enquiring officer who disbelieved the entries in Khasra register. In 1967, the petitioner was deputed to verify the site report of the Overseer in respect of the crop compensation of the banna orchard on plot Nos. 1 and 138 of Mauza Rampur Khurd. On the spot verification the petitioner found 19,862 standing banna plants on plot No. 1 and 5,821 on plot No. 138, amounting to Rs. 30,922.00 and 7.680.00, respectively, as found by the Overseer. Shree Sidhshwar Prasad the then Executive Engineer, Tirhut Canal Division, Motihari, also agreed with the verification report of the petitioner after spot enquiry which he held on 30-3-1967 and passed the crop compensation Bill for Rs. 30,922.00 and Rs. 7,680.00 to the banana orchard owners. Subsequently, 15 charges were framed against the petitioner which were communicated to him under the department's memo No. 138,dated the 24th of October, 1967, a true copy of which charge is marked Annexure 4 to the present writ application. It appears that a joint departmentanl proceeding was held by Shri N. Sanyal, the Conducting Officer, against the petitioner Sidheshwar Prasad, to Executive Engineer, and Mithilesh Kumarpetingh and Mahendra Kumar Sinha, Overseers. On 19th October, 1968, the enquiring officer submitted his enquiry report to the department exonerating the petitioner and the other three persons from all the charges levelled against them, as they were not found guilty of those charges. The relevant extract from the enquiry report dated 19th of October, 1968, in respect of the petitioner is annexed as annexure 6 to the writ application. The Government, on a consideration of the above enquiry report, exonerated Sidheshwar Prasad, the 'Executive Engineer of the charges levelled against him and promoted him to the rank of the Superintending Engineer, under Government notification No. 1912 dated 28-6-1972. But, in the case of the petitioner, Sri S.A.F. Abbas, the then Chief Administrator and the Secretary to the Government of Bihar River Valley Projects Department (respondent No. 4) on 13-10-1969, served second show cause notice (Annexure 7) to the petitioner as to why the petitioner should not be removed from the Government service on the ground that out of the fifteen charges levelled against him in the said proceeding, the Government had found him guilty of all charges except charge No. 14. On 17-10-1969, respondent No. 4 issued a letter (Annexure 8) in continuation of the letter dated 13th of October, 1969, further stating the grounds on which the Government disagreed with the report of the enquiring officer and alleging certain fresh charges which were not the subject-matter of the aforesaid departmental proceeding. It was to be read along with the letter dated 13th October, 1969. By another letter dated 1st of November, 1969 (Annexure 10), the petitioner was further asked to show cause within two weeks of the receipt of the letter as to why the proposed punishment of his removal from Government service be not inflicted. On 11-11-1969, the petitioner submitted his show cause a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure 11 to this writ application.

(3.) The petitioner has filed the application on 1st of August, 1972. Subsequently, on 25th of October, 1972, the petitioner filed an application under Order 6, Rule 17 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In paragraph 3 of the said amendment petition the petitioner stated that the Government in the River Valley Project Department under letter dated 11th October, 1972, found the charges of gross misconduct, cheating, fraud and corruption proved against the petitioner and removed the petitioner from the service of the department with effect from the date of the order which was received by the petitioner on 12th October, 1972. A true copy of the order of removal dated 11th October, 1972, is marked as Annexure 12 to the amendment petition. In the said petition, the petitioner has prayed for allowing him to amend the writ application which he had filed earlier, On 25th October 1972 this Court ordered. The petition for amendment of the writ application is allowed and this petition will be treated as a part of the writ application. The writ application will be heard " By the said amendment application the petitioner prayed for quashing the order contained in Annexure 12.