RAMASHISH TANTI Vs. PROJECTS & DEVELOPMENT INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner who has relied upon the technicality alleging that proper opportunity of defence was not given in the departmental enquiry and further that the enquiry officer's report was not given to the petitioner.

(2.) The appellate order enclosed as Annexure-16 to this petition mentions on page 56-57 of the paper book in para-13 of the order that the petitioner admitted in the departmental enquiry on 25.2.2002 in writing that he belonged to Tanti community. The learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that at the departmental enquiry this admission was taken from the petitioner under duress. The argument seems to have been concocted for the purpose of the writ petition because in reply to the second show-cause notice issued on 23.09.2002 the same admission was made by the petitioner. This admission made in reply to the second show-cause notice could not possibly be under duress. It has been held in the appellate order that Tanti community is O.B.C. and not Scheduled Caste while the petitioner had obtained employment and subsequent benefits by wrongly describing himself as belonging to Scheduled Caste. Annexure-2 to this writ petition is a letter on behalf of the District Officer, Begusarai, to which reference has been made during argument. This letter records three crucial findings.

(3.) Thus in view of the above findings of pure fact, as well as the appellate order the petitioner did not belong to Scheduled Caste and he admittedly obtained the employment by furnishing wrong information claiming to belonging to Scheduled Caste and also got the benefit as a member of Scheduled Caste by getting promoted time to time out of the reserved quota of Scheduled Caste.