RIMA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner by way of the present writ petition has challenged the order of termination as contained in Memo No. 1191 dated 22.04.2017 whereby and where under the deceased husband of the petitioner herein namely, Uday Pratap Singh has been dismissed from his services as constable in Kaimur district with effect from 05.03.2012.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the Director General of Police issued an order dated 15.01.1998 directing for appointment of Home guards including the husband of the petitioner herein where after, the Sergeant Major, Police Line, Mohaniya, sent a letter to the Inspector, Home guard, Kaimur on 27.07.1998 regarding appointment of three Home guards including the husband of the petitioner herein. After the husband of the petitioner was appointed and was working to the satisfaction of all concerned, suddenly, the appointment of the husband of the petitioner on the post of Home guard/constable was cancelled by an order dated 08.05.2003. The said order dated 08.05.2003 was challenged by the husband of the petitioner and two other constables in C.W.J.C. No. 10603 of 2003, which was allowed by an order dated 08.01.2007 and the husband of the petitioner was directed to be reinstated in service, however, the authorities were given liberty to proceed against the petitioner if they so wish. Thereafter, the husband of the petitioner was reinstated in service on 03.08.2007 and continued to work without any impediment.

(3.) The further case of the petitioner is that her husband was proceeded departmentally on the allegation of his appointment being irregular and illegal, however, during the pendency of the departmental proceeding, the husband of the petitioner died in harness on 05.03.2012 while discharging his duties. Nonetheless, the Superintendent of Police, Kaimur (Bhabhua) by the impugned order dated 22.04.2017 has passed the order of punishment against the husband of the petitioner herein directing that the husband of the petitioner be deemed to have been dismissed from service with effect from the date of his death i.e. 05.03.2012. It has further been directed in the said order dated 22.04.2017 that except what the husband of the petitioner has received during his service period, no further benefit would be payable to him. It may be pertinent to mention here that in the impugned order dated 22.04.2017 itself, it has been admitted that since the husband of the petitioner had died in the intervening night of 04/05.03.2012 while he was on duty, no final show cause notice could be issued regarding his dismissal from service.