JAYATRI DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.

(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order, as contained in Memo No. 2176 dated 30. 09. 2003 (Annexure-2), whereby respondent no. 4- the Superintendent of police, Chatra, has terminated the services of the husband of the petitioner. Further prayer is to direct the respondent to pay deathcum-retiral benefits to the petitioner, who has succeeded the estate of her husband on his death.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner was working as driver constable in police department and while he was in service, he lost his mental balance and the other day, under the same state of mind, the husband of the petitioner took a vehicle, which unfortunately, met with an accident and thereupon, a departmental proceeding was initiated but as the husband of the petitioner was not mentally fit, he was quite oblivious of the implications of the departmental proceeding and hence, he did not appear but the department should have waited for some time in order to provide adequate time to the husband of the petitioner to recover from mental illness and then the department should have proceeded with the departmental proceeding but instead of adopting that measure, the enquiry officer without giving ample opportunities to the husband of the petitioner, proceeded with the proceeding ex-parte and submitted a report upon which, disciplinary authority passed an order of termination of the service of the husband of the petitioner and, therefore, under this situation order of termination can certainly be said to be illegal and unjustified.