DHARMENDRA KUMAR SINHA YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 21.5.97 passed by respondent no.3, the Deputy Commissioner by which the petitioner has been ordered to be removed from service and also the order dated 1.6.92 passed by respondent no.2, Commissioner who dismissed the Service Appeal no. 47/91 preferred by the petitioner and affirmed the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh.

(2.) THE facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner was appointed as a Revenue karmachari in the year, 1985 and was posted in Topchanchi circle within the district of Dhanbad. Petitioner's case is that since the .date of joining he has been discharging his duties to the satisfaction of all his superiors and there was never any complaint, whatsoever, against him. It appears that in the year, 1991 some complaints were made by the local people making allegations against the petitioner that he demanded bribe for issuance of correction slip. The said complaint was submitted before trainee IAS, Officer who sent an adverse report and recommended for suspension of the petitioner. The petitioner was' accordingly suspended by the Deputy Commissioner and a departmental proceeding was initiated against him. It appears that one Mr. K.L. Deo, Deputy Collector was appointed enquiry officer to conduct the departmental proceeding against the petitioner and a memo of charge was served on the petitioner on 12.3.91. Petitioner's further case is that he demanded for supply for relevant papers on the basis of which charge was framed but the same was not supplied to him and the conducting officer without giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing, examined witnesses and submitted his report to the Deputy Commissioner to the effect that the charges had been proved against the petitioner. On the basis of the report of the Enquiry Officer, the Deputy Commissioner passed the impugned order of dismissal of the petitioner from service. The petitioner then filed service appeal before the Commissioner which was dismissed and the order of dismissal was affirmed.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been field wherein it is, inter alia, stated that on receipt of the complaint petitions against the petitioner, the then Circle Officer, Sri A.K. Jha, IAS trainee got the matter verified by the local Circle Inspector and found the allegations true. He, therefore, reported the matter to the Deuty Commissioner, Dhanbad and recommended for suspension of the petitioner. It is further stated that the Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry properly after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and found the allegations true. On the basis of the said report the Deputy Commissioner passed order of dismissal of the petitioner from service. According to the respondents the petitioner had participated in the enquiry and the memo of charge and other documents were served on him. It is further stated that a second show cause notice before passing the order of punishment was not necessary in view of the notification no. S.O. 567 dated 19.4.89 whereby the competent authority has been empowered to pass appropriate order of punishment without issuing second show cause notice.