MADHEY CHANDRA MANDAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred for quashing the order no. 30 dated 31.01.2003 issued by the respondent -Deputy Commissioner, Godda, whereby the petitioner was directed to deposit Rs. 2,93,689 on account of salary and allowances paid to him for the period 1st February, 1999 to 4th October, 1999.

(2.) ACCORDING to the respondents, the petitioner deliberately continued in service beyond his date of superannuation i.e. 31st January, 1999.

(3.) THE respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavits and a supplementary counter affidavit has also been filed thereafter. In the first counter affidavit, the respondents have sought to justify the issuance of the impugned order on the ground that the petitioner remained in service in full knowledge of his date of 1st retirement contrary to the Circular dated April, 1991. It is submitted that the impugned order was passed after it was detected that service book had been tampered with and therefore show cause notice was also issued contained in Annexure -F Memo no. 336 dated 1st October, 2002 under the signature of the Deputy Commissioner, Godda. It is further submitted that in the show cause submitted by the petitioner, he has accepted his guilt and therefore the impugned order was passed. However, in the supplementary counter affidavit, it appears that the respondents have subsequently taken a decision on th August, 2005 (Annexure -H) to initiate a proceeding under the provision (A)(1) of Rule 43 B of Bihar/Jharkhand Pension Rule for recovery of the said amount of Rs.2,93,689 against the petitioner on the charges of having tempered with the date of birth in the service book and continued in service after his natural date of retirement.