JAG NARAYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for quashing the Circular as contained in Circular No. 4538, dated 22.07.2008, issued under the signature of the Respondent No. 3 for initiation of the departmental proceedings in exercise of power conferred under Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930 and the petitioner has further prayed for quashing the second show cause notice as contained in letter dated 4601 dated 06.08.2011, which has been issued by the Respondent No. 4 in pursuance to the departmental proceeding initiated vide Circular dated 22.07.2008.

(2.) Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts, as disclosed in the writ application, are that the petitioner, initially after being successful in the 22nd Combined Competitive Examination conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission, was appointed and has been allotted the Bihar Administrative Service Cadre. After entering into service and putting on a considerable length of service, the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation. It has been averred in the writ application that after retirement from services to the utter surprise and consternation, the petitioner was served with the Circular dated 22.07.2008, issued by the Respondent No. 3, intimating about the decision of the Government to initiate departmental proceeding under Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930 along with the memorandum of charges. After receipt of the said Circular, the petitioner submitted his explanation, clearly stating about the bar of initiation of departmental proceeding against a member of service under the provisions of Rule 55 of the aforesaid Rule. The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry and submitted report before the Disciplinary Authority, as evident from Annexure-3 to the writ application. Thereafter, a second show cause notice was issued on 06.08.2011 by which a proposed punishment of recovery of 20 per cent of pension under the provisions of Rule 139 (b) of the Jharkhand Pension Rule was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner has given his reply to the second show cause notice as evident from Annexure-4 to the writ application. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned Circular dated 22.07.2008 vide Annexure- 1 and the second show cause notice dated 06.08.2011 vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition, the petitioner having no speedy, efficacious and alternative remedy, has been constrained to approach this Court for redressal of his grievances.

(3.) When the matter was taken up on 16.09.2011, an interim order has been passed to the effect that the Respondent No. 2 has been restrained from taking a final decision pursuant to the Memo No. 4538, dated 22.07.2008 and letter No.4601, dated 06.08.2011.