AKHILESHWAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

(2.) The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying for quashing and setting aside the decision as contained in Office Order No. 188 dtd. 10/4/2008 issued by Respondent No. 3; whereby the petitioner has been awarded punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect with further direction to recover a sum of Rs.50,000.00 from the petitioner. The petitioner has also challenged the appellate order dtd. 4/1/2010 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been rejected.

(3.) The brief facts as disclosed in the instant writ application are that while the petitioner was posted as Junior Engineer under the Executive Engineer, Road Division, Supaul, Bihar, some complaints were made to the office of the Lok Ayukta, Bihar in the year 1998 with respect to irregularities committed in construction of bridge in Ratauli Panchayat of the Supaul district. Subsequently, when the State of Bihar was bifurcated on 15/11/2000, in view of the provisions enshrined in Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, the service of the petitioner was allocated to the State of Jharkhand. After bifurcation of State; an explanation was sought for from the petitioner from the office of the Lokayukta, Bihar to which the petitioner duly replied. It also appears from records that the office of the Lokayukta, Bihar sent a report on 18/7/2002 to the Commissioner and Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar in which it was recommended that three increments of the petitioner be stopped and he should not be posted in works and it was also recommended that Rs.1.00 lakh should be recovered from the petitioner and one Shri Ramayan Ram holding the post of Executive Engineer to the extent of Rs.50,000.00 (Fifty thousand) each. Pursuant thereto; Respondent No.5, vide its letter dtd. 15/1/2003 directed the petitioner to submit his reply. Thereafter, Respondent No.4 requested Secretary, Road Construction Department, State of Jharkhand to take appropriate action in the light of the recommendation of the Lok Ayukta, Bihar. Thereafter, Respondent No.3 without issuing any charge-sheet and/or without any departmental proceeding and without following due procedure of law; passed the impugned order (Annexure-1); whereby the petitioner has been awarded punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect along with a direction to recover Rs.50,000.00 from the etitioner.