LAWS(JHAR)-2013-11-38

DIL CHAND KUMAR MANDAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On November 22, 2013
Dil Chand Kumar Mandal and Mahabir Singh Appellant
V/S
The State of Jharkhand, Civil Court, Ranchi, through the learned Judicial Commissioner, The Jharkhand High Court through Registrar General and The Registrar, Civil Court, Ranchi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Assailing the order of punishment whereby the petitioners were removed from service, they have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. The brief facts of the case as disclosed in the writ petition are that, the petitioner No. 1 was appointed on 28.07.1989 on a Class-IV post and the petitioner No. 2 was appointed on 25.06.1971 as a Peon. In the mid-night of 12th September, 2002 a fire broke Out in the court room of Shri A.K. Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi and judicial records, registers, tables etc. were destroyed. The petitioners were deputed as night-guards, when the incident took place. The petitioners were suspended and a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against them in which a charge-memo dated 02.12.2002 was served upon the petitioners on the allegation that, they were not vigilant in their duty at the time when the fire incident took place in the Civil Court premises. It was alleged that they were careless and therefore, liable to be punished for dereliction of duty. The enquiry report dated 20.05.2003 was submitted, a copy of which was not supplied to the petitioners. Without issuing second show-cause notice to the petitioners, the penalty orders both dated 11.02.2004 withholding one increment for one year, were passed by the Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi. By order dated 11.03.2004 it was further ordered that for the period of suspension, the petitioners would not be entitled for salary, allowances etc. except, subsistence allowance. On 03.07.2004 again show-cause notices were issued by the disciplinary authority to the petitioners for enhancing the punishment. The petitioners submitted their reply and thereafter, another show-cause notice was issued to the petitioners on 03.08.2004. The penalty orders contained in Memo No. 53/c and Memo No. 54/c, both dated 18.05.2005 of removal from service were passed which have been challenged in the present proceeding.

(2.) A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 3 stating that the disciplinary inquiry was conducted in accordance with the rules and observing the principles of natural justice. The petitioners participated in the enquiry and cross-examined the witnesses. On direction of the Hon'ble High Court fresh show-cause notices were issued to the petitioners requiring them to show-cause why the punishment awarded to them for dereliction of duty be not enhanced and thereafter, the punishment of removal from service has been passed and thus, the petitioners had sufficient notice and opportunity to defend themselves.

(3.) A counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent No. 4 also taking a similar stand. The petitioners have filed reply to the counter-affidavit and supplementary affidavit. Pursuant to order dated 28.06.2013, a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent No. 4.