AMRENDRA NARAIN SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Prabhash Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, learned GP -II for the State respondents,

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order as contained in Annexure 3 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Singhbhum (West) at Chaibasa whereby and whereunder the petitioner was dismissed from service. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the appellate order passed by the Deputy Inspector General oi Police, South Chhotanagpur Range being the order issued on 14.12.1995 (Annexure 4) conforming the order of dismissal.

(3.) THE enquiry report discloses that for the offences in relation to 6.2.1991, it has been found that the petitioner refused to accept the command for being on duty. So far as this charge is concerned, there is a finding against the petitioner. So far as the other charge is concerned i.e. the one relating to visit of Swami Shankaracharaya, the charge against the petitioner was that he was not on duty at 13.15 hours on 17.2.1991 (see the original order of dismissal as contained in Annexure 3). However, the enquiry report does not deal with it at all. On the contrary, the finding is that the petitioner did not go in the night patrolling duty on 17.2.1991 at 22.00 hours. Nothing has been said in relation to the charge i.e. not being present at 13.15 hours on 17.2.1991 for attending Swami Shankaracharya.