RAM GOBIND SHARMA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 22.06.2004 passed by the appellate authority against the order of dismissal from service of A.S.I of Police and the order dated 06.08.2003 passed by the respondent no.3 the disciplinary authority.

(2.) The facts, as has been disclosed in the writ application, in a nutshell, is that initially the petitioner was appointed as constable in the year 1964 and he was promoted to the post of A.S.I in the year 1979 on the basis of his unblemished service record. In the year 1984, while the petitioner was posted in the district of Dhanbad as A.S.I of Police, he was falsely entangled in a criminal case under Sec. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sec. 27 of the Indian Arms Act being Kurtha P.S. Case No.169 of 1984. On the basis of criminal case, a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner being Dhanbad departmental proceeding No.39 of 1986. In the criminal case, the petitioner was ultimately acquitted vide judgment dated 21.08.1998 as per Annexure-2 to the writ application. It has been averred in the writ application that the departmental proceeding which was initiated in the year 1986, was ultimately dropped in the year 2000, in view of the judgment dated 21.08.1998 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Jahanabad, but the respondent no.3 in utter violation of principles of natural justice recommended dismissal of the petitioner vide order dated 06.08.2003 (Annexure-3 to the writ application). Thereafter, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned order of dismissal, the petitioner preferred appeal, which was rejected by the appellate authority vide order dated 22.06.2004 affirming the order of disciplinary authority.

(3.) Mr. S.N. Tiwary, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondent no.3 in a very cavalier fashion reopened the departmental proceeding and passed the impugned order of dismissal in Dhanbad departmental proceeding No.39 of 1986, which was disposed of in the year 2000 that too after 17 years from the initiation of the said proceeding. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has been acquitted in the criminal case and the departmental proceeding was an offshoot of the criminal case. In view of the honourable acquittal of the criminal case, the action of the respondent no.3, the disciplinary authority, is not justified in imposing the order of punishment of dismissal from services on the concocted plea that the original record of the departmental proceeding has been managed to be misplaced by the petitioner, though the petitioner was not the custodian of the said record. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order of punishment of dismissal by disciplinary authority being affirmed by the appellate authority, have been passed in derogation of provision of Bihar Police Manual Rule 828(B) as contained in Appendix 49 of the said Rule.