(1.) THIS writ application is directed against the order as contained in office order No. 26 dated 19.6.2006 (Annexure 7) passed by the Conservator of Forest, Afforestation and Social Forestry, Circle Hazaribagh whereby respondent having found the petitioner guilty, for the charges put in a departmental enquiry, passed an order of punishment for recovering of a sum of Rs. 68395.20 from the petitioner. Further prayer is to quash the consequential order as contained in letter No. 371 dated 16.4.2007 (Annexure 9) whereby respondent in order to realize Rs. 68395.20 has passed an order to adjust Rs. 9000/ - from the salary and further a sum of Rs. 59,395.20 from the gratuity. Further prayer is to direct the respondent to fix the pay after including the annual increment which the petitioner was entitled to and to pay pension, gratuity and the amount of unutilized leave.
(2.) THE fact of the case which has given rise to this writ application is that petitioner on being appointed as Forest Guard joined the service on 1.7.1966 and in course of time, he was promoted to the post of Forester on 23.12.1998 and worked as Forester in Giridih Afforstation Division till 1999 and thereafter he joined Chatra Afforstation Range in the year 2000 where the petitioner was allotted some of the Afforestation work like weeding, hoeing in different plantation sites but, according to the case of the respondent, when it was found that no such work of hoeing has been done at the plantation sites and there has been grazing at the plantation sites due to which department was put to loss to the extent of Rs. 2,27,984/ -, a proceeding was initiated against the petitioner and others by the then Conservator of Forest, Hazaribagh, vide office order No. 46 dated 11.5.2004. One Kuldip Manjhi, ACF was appointed as enquiry officer, who after holding enquiry submitted report to the Disciplinary Authority, Conservator of Forest, Afforestation and Social Forestry, Circle Hazaribagh, who vide its office order No. 26 dated 19.6.2006 (Annexure 7) passed the order for recovery of Rs. 68,395.20 from the salary of the petitioner and also from the gratuity.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner was posted at Chatra, increment was not given on the plea that he was supposed to pass tribal language as per the Bihar Forest Rules but he did not pass that examination and on that count, increment was not given but the respondent forgot to take into consideration that barrier/restriction was limited to six districts and as per the other rule, whenever person gets transferred to other district or attains the age of 50, he would be entitled to increment and admittedly the petitioner had attained the age of 50 while he was posted at chatra and, therefore, the respondent illegally denied increment to the petitioner.