SHANTI DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground as lady constable on 28.2.2004 on the death of her husband in harness on 23.6.2003, while in the service of JAP-3. The grievance of the petitioner is that she has been dismissed from service by the impugned order contained in memo no 300 dated 9.2.2010 (Annexure-3) issued by the respondent No. 3, Commandant, JAP-10, Ranchi. The said order has been affirmed in appeal which is also under challenge being memo No. 932 dated 25.6.2011 (Annexure-5) passed by the D.I.G., JAP.

(2.) The contention of the petitioner is that departmental proceeding was initiated under charge contained in memo No. 292 dated 2.2.2009 (Annexure-2) with the allegation that she used to indulge in regular talks from the mobile No. 9708533551 with another mobile No. 9798365544 which belonged to unknown person. On receipt of anonymous complaint, the matter was inquired into by three Deputy Superintendent of Police namely Harman Tigga, John Guria and Emilda Ekka of JAP-10. The preliminary inquiry revealed that she was not aware of the owner of the said mobile number but later oil stated that it belonged to one of his cousin namely Hori Mahto of Village-Bero, P.S.-Tamar, District Ranchi. Later on she named the said person as Naresh Chandra Mahto @ Dhiran Mahto. The petitioner's explanation was not at all found to be satisfactory. Her conduct indicated that security of the battalion of JAP was being leaked where lots of arms and ammunition are also stored and may lead to some unpleasant incident. Call records of her number revealed that she had indulged in talk on a number of occasions on different dates, though she claims that she was not knowing him. This conduct of the petitioner was indicative of grave negligence which has been confirmed in the preliminary inquiry report. The inquiry proceeding, thereafter was conducted in which three Deputy Superintendent of Police, JAP-10 deposed as witnesses and the Inquiry Officer rendered the finding of guilt of the petitioner on the alleged misconduct.

(3.) It is submitted that after the submission of the inquiry report which is at Annexure-B to the first counter affidavit of the respondents submitted by the Dy. S.P.-cum-Conducting Officer, JAP-10, Ranchi, petitioner has been straightway punished by dismissal from the service by the impugned order contained at Annexure-3 dated 9.2.2010. Her appeal has also been rejected by the impugned order at Annexure-5 passed by the D.I.G., JAP, Ranchi.