AMOD KUMAR JHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of orders dated 23.11.2004 and 28.06.2005. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was appointed as Constable in the year 2000 however, he was given the additional work of driver. An accident took place on 19.07.2001 at Jarmundi, with respect to which an F.I.R. was lodged. The son of the deceased lady filed a Tide Claim Suit No. 02 of 2002 which was finally decreed on 31.08.2004 by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Dumka and an award of Rs. 1,13,000/- was passed in favour of the plaintiff as compensation. It appears that departmental proceeding No. 13 of 2001 was initiated by order dated 04.12.2001 and a charge of driving vehicle rashly and negligently was framed against the petitioner. By order dated 23.11.2004, on conclusion of the departmental enquiry an order of forfeiture of increment for a period of one year from the salary of the petitioner which would be equivalent to two black marks, was passed against the petitioner. The petitioner has not challenged the said order before the appellate authority. Thereafter, it appear, that the Superintendent of police, Sahebganj wrote a letter dated 31.05.2005 to the Director General of Police, Jharkhand seeking a direction for payment of compensation amount to the plaintiff in the Title Claim Suit No. 02 of 2002 and it appears that by letter dated 28.06.2005, the office of the Director General of Police communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Sahebganj that since the vehicle was plying for personal work therefore, the compensation should be paid by the driver and not by the State and pursuant to such communication from the Director General of Police by order dated 28.06.2005 the Superintendent of police, Sahebganj passed the impugned order dated 28.06.005 directing deduction of the compensation amount with interest from the salary of the petitioner in 40 equal installments. In these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court.

(2.) A counter-affidavit has been filed, in which, it has been stated that the petitioner was found guilty for negligently and rashly driving the registered against the petitioner and the son of the deceased lady filed Title Claim Suit No. 02 of 2002 seeking compensation which was allowed by the learned trial court by order dated 31.08.2004 and a compensation of Rs. 1,13,000/- was ordered to be given to the plaintiff. In the departmental proceeding, the misconduct of driving the vehicle negligently and rashly has been proved against the petitioner and order of penalty dated 23.11.2004 has not been challenged before the appellate authority by the petitioner. On these grounds, the impugned orders have been sought to be justified by the respondents.

(3.) Heard counsel for both the parties and perused the documents on record.