ALAKH NARAYAN JHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 17.5.1999, by which the services of the petitioner have been terminated. A copy of the order has been annexed as Annexure 5 to the writ application.

(2.) THE petitioner was working as a Chief Cashier in the year 1979 in the Patliputra Medical College, Dhanbad. In 1988 he was promoted to senior Selection Grade. In 1988 the then Principal of the College lodged a written report alleging misappropriation of money by the petitioner. On 26.2.1988 the petitioner was put under suspension. In 1989 the police submitted final form to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad on the ground that no case is made out against the petitioner. The Chief Judicial Magistrate did not accept the final form and directed to investigate the matter again. However, a charge - sheet was submitted and a criminal case is pending against the petitioner. Simultaneously, a departmental proceeding was also initiated against the petitioner. However, in 1988 the respondent No. 2, the Director in Chief, Health Services Bihar, Patna, vide his order dated 26.2.1998, revoked the suspension of the petitioner with a direction that a fresh enquiry shall be initiated against the petitioner and he further idirected the respondent No. 3, the Principal of the College to frame charge against the petitioner. The petitioners case is that in compliance of the direction of the Director in Chief, Health Service, after framing of charge, a fresh departmental enquiry proceeding was to be initiated against the petitioner, which was never done in the case. It is contended that after serving the memo of charge to the petitioner he submitted his show cause but no enquiry officer was appointed nor any departmental proceeding was initiated. In the meantime, the respondent No. 2, the Director in Chief, took a decision and directed the Principal of the College to pay the entire subsistence allowance to the petitioner. But all of a sudden the Principal of the College issued the impugned order dated 17.5.1999 terminating the services of the petitioner on the basis of charge framed on 10.7.1988.

(3.) FROM perusal of the impugned order dated 17.5.1999, it appears that the service of the petitioner has been terminated on the basis of charge and the departmental enquiry initiated in 1988 and also on the basis of second show cause notice issued on 28.4.1993. The question, therefore, falls for consideration is as to whether such order of termination, on the basis of enquiry conducted in 1988, is justified in law.