MAHENDRA PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present writ application for quashing the order as contained in Annexure -7 dated 12.9.96 by which the petitioner has been awarded following punishments : (i) the petitioner is entitled to only subsistence allowance during suspension, (ii) 25.4.95 should be treated as E.L. and (iii) withholding of two increments.

(2.) THE petitioner, at the relevant time was working as Assistant teacher in Middle School, War, Madanpur. On 25.4.95 the District Superintendent of Education made surprise inspection and the petitioner was found absent on that date. He was put under suspension and a departmental proceeding was initiated. Thereafter, the petitioner filed his show cause and the Area Education Officer was appointed as Enquiry Officer who after conclusion of the Enquiry, submitted a report on 5.8.95 holding that the petitioner was on leave on that date and as such he was not absent from duty. Thereafter, the impugned order has been passed by the District Superintendent of Education in accordance with order issued by the Chairman -cum -District Education Establishment Committee -cum -District Magistrate, Aurangabad. A copy of the said order is Annexure -7.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order on two grounds. Firstly, that the competent authority to pass the order in a departmental proceeding is the District Education Establishment Committee and not the Chairman and as such the impugned order has been passed under the direction of the Chairman only. Secondly, it has been submitted that once the Enquiry Officer found that the charges were not proved, the disciplinary authority, while passing the impugned order, should have assigned some reason though not elaborately for taking a different view in the matter.