BIJOY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT , a Headmaster of a Middle School was dismissed by an order dated 15th September, 1994 passed while concluding a disciplinary proceeding. In the charge -sheet, which was enquired in the High Court Of Judicature At Patna Versus Ram Kripal Prasad disciplinary proceeding, it was alleged that the appellant has withdrawn provident fund amounts belonging to six teachers of the said School but did not disburse the same. On appeal the appellate authority directed the punishment order to be kept in abeyance with a further direction upon the disciplinary authority to reconsider the matter after serving a copy of the enquiry report to the appellant. The enquiry report was then served upon the appellant. The appellant, however, did not file a representation against the enquiry report. The disciplinary authority then passed the final order dated 4th July, 1995 and thereby once again dismissed the appellant from service. Being aggrieved thereby, an appeal was preferred which having been dismissed the appellant filed a writ petition registered as CWJC No. 2998 of 1996. When the writ petition was heard, abandoning all other points taken in the writ petition, the counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the nature and quantum of punishment should be reconsidered. In the light of such submission the Court by its order dated 24th July, 2007, while disposed of the said writ petition, remitted back the matter to the appellate authority with a direction upon it to reconsider the question of nature and quantum of punishment. The appellate authority then decided once again to dismiss the appellant by its order dated 29th December, 1997. After having had failed in a review petition, the appellant re -approached this court by filing the writ petition, which having been dismissed by the order under appeal, the appellant has preferred this letters patent appeal.

(2.) THE learned single Judge, who dismissed the writ petition, held that all matters pertaining to the disciplinary proceeding stood concluded by the order of this court dated 24th July, 1997 passed in the first writ petition except the nature and quantum of punishment. The learned Judge felt that having regard to the finality pertaining to other aspects of the disciplinary proceedings, the Court in the writ petition can only consider the question of nature and quantum of punishment, but it cannot substitute the same; while it has authority to direct reconsideration. The learned Judge felt that having had directed reconsideration once, there is no scope of directing reconsideration once again.

(3.) AFTER alteration of Article 311 of the Constitution of India there is no scope of giving any second show cause. That being the position, there is not right of a Government employee to have a hearing at the time of awarding punishment.