LAWS(JHAR)-2003-7-134

MOHAMMAD WASE KHAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On July 14, 2003
Mohammad Wase Khan Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order of dismissal dated 27.4.1996 passed by the respondent No. 5 as contained in Annexure 12. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing the order dated 11.10.1996 which is contained in Annexure 14 and which has been passed by the appellate authority (respondent No. 4) rejecting the appeal and upholding the order dated 27.4.1996. The petitioner also prays for quashing of the order dated 20.1.1998 as contained in Annexure 17 and which has been passed by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (Director General of Police and Inspector General of Police) rejecting the Memorial filed by the petitioner.

(2.) MR . H. Waris, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a very short point in this case. He firstly drew attention of this Court to Annexure 9/1 which is the Enquiry Report and submitted that the Enquiry Officer did not find the petitioner guilty. Thereafter, by Annexure 10 the petitioner was reinstated in service but his suspension was not revoked. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a fresh application vide Annexure 11 wherein he prayed that the order of suspension be revoked as he had not been found guilty by the Enquiry Officer. Instead of considering the case of the petitioner, the authorities passed an order on 27.4.1996 being D.O. No. 824/96 (Annexure 12) whereby and whereunder the petitioner was dismissed from service.

(3.) THE dismissal order, on the other hand, proceeds to record that prior to his appointment, the petitioner was an accused in these two cases in which charge -sheets had been submitted and therefore, the charge that the petitioner was a person of criminal nature was established. The dismissal order also records that during the pendency of the trial, the petitioner in collusion with the complainant/informant entered into a compromise as a result of which the case could not be decided on merits. On the basis of the aforementioned reasonings, the disciplinary passed an order of dismissal.