SAMBHOO SINGH, SON OF SHRI R.P. SINGH, RESIDENT OF C/O SHRI S.P SINGH, STATION ROAD, CHUTIA, P.O AND P.S. CHUTIA, DISTRICT Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has sought for quashing the office order dated 24.05.2008 pertaining to imposition of punishment of censure, withholding of two annual increments with non cumulative effect and only subsistence allowance will be paid during the period of suspension; and the petitioner has further prayed for direction to the respondents to release the arrears of difference of salary for the period of suspension i.e. from 02.12.2006 till 24.12.2008 and the petitioner has further prayed for release of arrears of salary due since Aug., 2006 to 07.12.2006 along with penal interest @ 18% per annum.

(2.) The brief facts, as disclosed in the writ application, is that while the petitioner was posted as Junior Engineer, Road Construction Department, a show cause was issued to him under the signature of respondent no.3 as contained in letter dated 01.08.2006 asking him to submit his reply for the alleged irregularities committed by him as evident from Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Along with the show cause, a memorandum of charges has been served on the petitioner containing two allegations. The first allegation is that the petitioner is discharging his duties on his own volition without any Government order and the second allegation levelled against the petitioner is that he used to live in the Inspection Bung low, Dhanbad without paying rent and electricity bill causing irregularities and pecuniary loss to the Government. The petitioner submitted his reply denying the allegations levelled against him. In this aspect the posting order of the petitioner as Junior Engineer, Dhanbad vide Annexure-3 and the order of the Deputy Development Commissioner, Dhanbad vide Annexure-4 and the order of the Executive Engineer, Road Division, Dhanbad vide Annexure-5 would go to show that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are absolutely incorrect. Without considering the show cause reply submitted by the petitioner, the respondent authorities decided to place the petitioner under suspension in contemplation of departmental proceeding in exercise of power conferred under Rule 3(a) (i) (a) of the Bihar and Orissa Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rule 1935 as contained in Annexure-7. In the said order also it has been mentioned that the petitioner will be entitled to subsistence allowance under Rule 96 of the Service Code. In pursuance to the departmental proceeding the enquiry officer was appointed and after conclusion of the enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted report and both the charges levelled against the petitioner have not been proved by the enquiry officer, which is apparent from the enquiry report dated 05.02.2007 vide Annexure-11 to the writ petition. Though the enquiry officer absolved the petitioner from the charges, the same was not accepted by the disciplinary authority and the enquiry officer was directed to conduct further enquiry and against the said decision the petitioner approached this Court vide W.P. (S) No.2034 of 2007 and the same was allowed vide order dated 12.02.2008 and direction for fresh enquiry was quashed by this Court and respondent authorities were directed to proceed with the matter in accordance with law as evident from Annexure-12 to the writ petition. Thereafter, the respondent authorities passed orders on 24.05.2008 imposing the aforementioned punishment as evident from Annexure-13 to the writ petition.

(3.) During pendency of the writ application, an interlocutory application being I.A. no.1507 of 2009 was filed by the petitioner, challenging the impugned order dated 01.04.2009 on the ground that respondents have passed the order to rectify the lacuna and second show cause notice issued on 14.10.2008 by staying order dated 24.05.2008 as per Annexure-14 to the writ application and the said interlocutory application has been treated as part of the writ application.