VIKAS KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , who is a member of the Bihar Superior Judicial Service and at the relevant time was holding the post of Director, Bihar Judicial Officers Training Institute, Patna under Notification of the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department of the State Government, bearing Memo No. 7136 dated, 5th September, 2002, Annexure -1, has filed this writ application questioning the legality and validity of the Order, bearing Memo No. 6631 -33 dated, 10th July, 2006, Annexure -9 to this application placing him under suspension with effect from the date of issue of the said Order in contemplation of a departmental proceeding to be initiated against him.

(2.) He has further assailed the validity of the memorandum, bearing Memo No. 9925 dated, 25th September, 2006, Annexure -10 to this application, whereunder departmental proceeding has been drawn against him and he has been served with article of charges, statement of allegations and list of documents/witnesses, which are to be relied upon in support of the charges as according to him the statement of allegations read with documents relied upon in support thereof does not make out any case of misconduct for which he can be proceeded against in a departmental proceeding. It is contended on behalf of the Petitioner that the suspension Order dated, 10th July, 2006, Annexure -9 is violative of Rules 9 and 16 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), as on the date of issue of the suspension Order, Petitioner was on deputation with the State Government and holding the post of Director, Bihar Judicial Officers Training Institute, Patna and the High Court without recalling his services was not justified in placing him under suspension as according to the Petitioner during the period, Petitioner held the post of Director, Bihar Judicial Officers Training Institute, Patna, he continued on deputation until his services were recalled by the High Court, the High Court was not justified in placing him under suspension by passing the impugned Order, Annexure -9. In this connection, learned Counsel for the Petitioner relied upon the provisions contained in Article 235 read with Article 236(b) of the Constitution of India and Rules 9 and 16 of the Rules as also on the Judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Sfafe of Orissa V/s. Sudhansu Sekhar Misra and Ors. reported in AIR 1968 Supreme Court 647, paragraphs 11 and 16.

(3.) IT is also submitted on his behalf that close perusal of the memorandum initiating the departmental proceeding, Annexure -10 containing the article of charges and statement of allegations in support of charges framed against the Petitioner would indicate that he is being proceeded against on two allegations, namely, that he met the then District and Sessions Judge, Motihari three times for the purposes of exerting influence on the District Magistrate, Motihari to pass favourable Orders in his favour in the matters then pending before the District Magistrate, Motihari. The other allegation is that he pressurised the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari to wriggle out of Turkaulia P.S. Case No. 318 of 2005 registered for the offences under Sections 147,148,149, 307, 302 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act lodged in connection with occurrence dated, 12th December, 2005 in which accused persons attempted to take forcible possession of lands in question killing five persons and injuring fifteen persons in which Petitioner was named by the informant, Md. Azhar in his protest petition dated, 16th December, 2005 as the main conspirator behind the occurrence. From the memorandum, Annexure -10, it further appears that in support of the aforesaid two allegations, the High Court proposed to rely amongst others, the following documents, namely, the undated, allegation petition of the informant, Md. Azhar addressed to Hon ble the Chief Justice, Patna High Court, Annexure -7, letter of the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari, bearing No. 2908 dated, 13th December, 2005 and the confidential report submitted by the then District and Sessions Judge, East Champaran at Motihari, bearing Letter No. 35/C dated, 22nd February, 2006, Annexure -8.