SHYAM NAND SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein has impugned the ORDER imposing punishment Annexure -1 dated January 11, 1990 whereby the petitioner has been deprived of the full gratuity payable to him under the rules and in addition 10% of the pension has been withheld permanently. It has further been directed that during the period of suspension, the petitioner shall not be entitled to the payment of any other amount other than the subsistence allowance.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was posted as the Potato to Development Officer at Patna. An explanation was sought from the petitioner on 23.8.1972 asking him to justify the acceptance of tender of M/s Himalaya Cold Storage, Muzaffarpur in the year 1970. The petitioner furnished his explanation, but ultimately by ORDER :dated 18.8.1977, the petitioner and two persons were placed under suspension. Thereafter a chargesheet was submitted on 16.2.1978 against the petitioner. The ORDER :of suspension was quashed by this Court on 18.4.1978. but the departmental proceeding continued. The petitioner superannuated from service on 30th September. 1985. Even thereafter explanations were repeatedly asked for from the petitioner, the last one on 18.12.1986. It appears that thereafter the impugned ORDER :was passed on 11.1.1990.

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submitted that the occurrence, which was subject matter of the inquiry, took place as early as in the year 1970 and therefore under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, the respondents could not continue with the proceeding with a view to impose any punishment either under the conduct rules or under the Bihar Pension Rules. It was secondly submitted that though an inquiry was conducted, the report of the inquiring officer was never served upon the petitioner. His case is that, in fact, no evidence was led in the inquiry. He, therefore, submitted that without affording the petitioner an opportunity of representing his case and commenting on the findings of the inquiring officer, the impugned ORDER :has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice.