AMBIKA SINGH PATEL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia, prayed for quashing memo dated 02.10.2010, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from services, and quashing of appellate order dated 13.05.2011 and memorial order dated 28.04.2012.

(2.) The factual exposition, as has been delineated in the writ application, is that the present petitioner-constable along with one Chaukidar was deputed to escort one accused Mukesh Kumar Mehta to C.J.M Court, Hazaribagh for his production. It is submitted that they escorted the accused properly to Court, where they were told to come later, hence, they came at 4.00 O 'clock, then they were told to took the accused to C.J.M residence. Accordingly, they took the accused to C.J.M residence where signature of the prisoner was taken and after completing all necessary formality, accused was directed to send back jail. Thereafter, they took the accused by foot and at District More took a rickshaw to hand over the accused in jail on time. The chaukidar did not sit on the rickshaw. As soon as, he reached near Indira Gandhi High School, two persons came on motorcycle and on the point of pistol took away the accused. Thereafter, the petitioner immediately informed the Sadar Police Station, but, F.I.R was not lodged on his statement rather it was lodged on the statement of Chaukidar. It has been submitted that charge was framed for the above occurrence and departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, which culminated to dismissal from services. Being aggrieved by the order of dismissal dated 02.10.2010, the petitioner preferred appeal, which was also dismissed vide order dated 13.05.2011, against which, he preferred memorial. However, during pendency of the memorial, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing W.P. (S) No. 6283 of 2012, which was disposed of vide order dated 27.11.2012 in the light of the statement made by learned counsel for the State that memorial shall be disposed of within a period of 90 days. Thereafter, the memorial of the petitioner was also rejected vide order dated 28.04.2012.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order passed by the disciplinary authority, appellate authority and the revisional authority, the present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for the aforesaid reliefs.