PRAVESH CHANDRA SINHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) Petitioner, in this writ petition, has challenged the order contained in Memo No.2658/Go dtd. 26/7/2017 (Annexure 9 to the writ petition), communicated vide letter contained in Memo No.2510 dtd. 9/8/2017, by which the appellate authority has rejected the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority as contained in Memo No.2157/Go dtd. 10/5/2017 (Annexure 7 to the writ petition) by which annual increment of the petitioner for six months has been stopped/withheld.

(3.) Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is no ground to initiate departmental proceeding against the petitioner. He submits that though the case diary was called for, but, it was the duty of the Investigating Officer to send the Case Diary to the High Court for consideration in A.B.A. No. 621 of 2016. He submits that since the petitioner had given instructions to the Investigating Officer to forward the Case Diary, he cannot be said to have committed any misconduct. He submits that if there is any fault, it lies on the part of the Investigating Officer. He submits that punishment of stoppage of annual increment of the petitioner for six months has been inflicted upon the petitioner. He submits that the punishment inflicted is equivalent to one black mark and the same is disproportionate and excessive.