STATE OF BIHAR Vs. KEDAR NATH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State of Bihar has preferred this appeal in terms of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Fatna High Court, and is aggrieved by the order dated 30.7.1999, passed in C.W.J.C. No.8883 of 1997, whereby the writ petition preferred by respondent no.l herein (Kedar Nath Singh) has been allowed, and the order of dismissal from service passed against him by the learned appellate authority by invoking the powers of enhancement has been set aside. We shall go by the description of the parties occurring in the writ petition

(2.) . A brief statement of facts is essential for disposal of this appeal. The writ petitioner (respondent no.1 herein) was appointed as a Company Commander (equivalent to Sub -Inspector of Police) in Bihar Homeguards on 2.6.1966. He was promoted to the next higher post of Inspector on 1.1.1982. While he was posted at Khagaria a group of Homeguard Jawans filed a joint application before the Superintendent of Police, Khagaria complaining that the petitioner had been extorting money from his subordinates by way of illegal gratification for distribution of duties, placement, transfer etc. A preliminary enquiry was conducted, leading to a detailed enquiry. The enquiry report was submitted on 12.1.1989. By order dated 23.11.1989 (Annexure -2), passed by the Commandant General, he was reverted to the post of Company Commander for a period of three years commencing on 22.11.1989. The petitioner preferred appeal in terms of Rule 851 of the Bihar Police Manual 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1978 Manual. The appeal was dismissed by order dated 20.9.1994 and decision was also taken in terms of Rule 853 - A (c) of the 1978 Manual, whereby show -cause notice was issued to him as to why the punishment be not enhanced. The petitioner had shown cause by his communication dated 31.7.1995 (Annexure -15). On a consideration of the materials on record including the cause shown, the State Government decided to enhance the punishment and dismissed the petitioner from service. The consequential order was issued on 28.8.1997 (Annexure -1), conveying to him the order of dismissal from service. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner preferred the instant writ petition which has been allowed on the sole ground that there is no provision for enhancement of punishment in the Bihar and Orissa Police Manual 1930, and has consequently set aside the order of dismissal. It is relevant to state that the petitioner had completed his period of reversion of three years and has been restored to the original position of Inspector, vide order dated 13.1.1993 (Annexure -13) . The State of Bihar feels aggrieved by the order of the learned writ court.

(3.) THE learned Standing Counsel submits that the order was passed under the 1978 Manual, whereas the learned writ court has instead relied on the quondam Bihar and Orissa Police Manual 1930 (hereinafter referred to as the '1930 Manual '), which stood repealed with the promulgation of the 1978 Manual.