PREM KUMAR SON OF RAMESHWAR PRASAD Vs. BOKARO STEEL LIMITED, BOKARO STEEL CITY, DISTRICT: BOKARO & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for quashing order dated 20.09.2006 issued by Managing Director, communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 22.11.2006 whereby appeal preferred by the petitioner against order of dismissal dated 08.01.1993 has been dismissed confirming the order of dismissal passed by the disciplinary authority and further prayer has been made for quashing order dated 08.01.1993 pertaining to dismissal of the petitioner from services. The petitioner has further prayed for direction upon the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in services with all consequential benefits.

(2.) The factual matrix, as delineated in the writ application, is that initially the petitioner was appointed by the respondents authorities on the post of Casual Khalasi in the year 1985. It is alleged that for obtaining employment, the petitioner submitted his Original Caste Certificate issued by District Welfare Officer, Begusarai, in which, the petitioner's Caste was mentioned as 'Pasi'. However, on the basis of complaint that the caste certificate produced by the petitioner is forged one, a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, which resulted in dismissal of the petitioner from services. It has further been averred that B.D.O., Balia, Begusarai had lodged an F.I.R against the petitioner being Balia P.S. Case No. 88 of 1989 (G.R. No. 1337 of 1989) under Sections 420 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, in which, the petitioner was acquitted vide judgment dated 11.03.1998. After acquittal from the aforesaid criminal case, the petitioner submitted representation to the respondents-authorities for reinstatement in services with back wages, but it fell on deaf ear, hence, the petitioner knocked the door of this Court by filing C.W.J.C No. 1475 of 2000(R), which was disposed of vide order dated 14.07.2006 with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal and respondents were directed to dispose of the appeal within a period of three months from the date of order. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner preferred appeal, which was dismissed vide order dated 211.2006 confirming the order passed by the disciplinary authority.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate authority as well as by the disciplinary authority, the petitioner has approached this Court for redressal of his grievances under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.