INDRA NATH JHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Seeking quashing of order dated 18.12.2002, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(2.) The brief facts as disclosed in this writ petition are that, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Accounts Clerk on 08.08.1980. He was put under suspension on 18.07.2000 in contemplation of a departmental proceeding. On 16.11.2000, the petitioner submitted his written explanation however, an enquiry was ordered against the petitioner. The enquiry officer submitted a report on 09.05.2001 in which, no finding with respect to themisconduct alleged was recorded by the enquiry officer. By Resolution dated 30.07.2002, another departmental proceeding was initiated appointing one Shri Shashi Shankar Samant as enquiry officer. The petitioner moved High Court in W.P. (S) No.5779 of 2002 for quashing of order of suspension dated 18.07.2000 and Resolution dated 30.07.2002, whereby a second departmental enquiry was sought to be initiated. The writ petition was disposed of on 10.12.2002 permitting the Department to pass a final order after considering the reply of the petitioner to the second showcause notice and the petitioner was permitted to raise all objections in reply to second showcause and all the points of law raised in the Writ Petition. On 20.12.2002, the petitioner submitted his written reply to the second showcause notice raising various objections such as, violation of principles of natural justice and initiation of second departmental enquiry not sustainable in law. On 18.12.2002, the impugned order of punishment of dismissal from service was passed.

(3.) A counteraffidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondents, in which, it has been specifically stated that in view of the inability of the earlier enquiry officer to continue with the departmental proceeding, as some of his seniors were also involved in the matter, another enquiry officer was appointed and a fresh departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner. During the first departmental proceeding also, the charge of misappropriationagainst the petitioner has been found proved. The petitioner was afforded all reasonable opportunity to defend himself and on a consideration of materials on record, the impugned order of dismissal from service dated 18.12.2002 has been passed.