KAMAL KISHORE SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The penalty order dated 07.10.2011 and the appellate order dated 10.01.2013 are under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer on 31.11987 and while posted as Junior Engineer, MESO Area, Latehar, it is alleged that he did not complete construction of two hostels and rooms in Schedule Tribe Boys Residential High School, Jonki Pokhar, Netarhat and other works. On 13.07.2007 a showcause notice was issued to the petitioner, why Rs.24,40,000/- only was adjusted against Rs.91,50,000/- which was given to him for execution of different schemes at MESO area, Latehar, however, in order dated 28.08.2007 by which he was put under suspension allegation levelled against him is of non-adjustment of Rs.40,47,752/- against the aforesaid advance of Rs.91.50 lacs. A charge-memo dated 27.09.2007 was served upon him on the allegation that he has failed to account for Rs.91.50 lacs given to him as advance. The respondents have pleaded that in the departmental proceeding the petitioner appeared only on 15.01.2008 and 21.01.2008. An enquiry report was submitted by the Deputy Development Commissioner on 26.03.2008 and second show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 24.04.2008. Responding to the second show-cause notice, the petitioner submitted his representation on 07.05.2008 seeking supply of certain documents, however, documents were not supplied to him. Constrained, he submitted his reply to second show-cause notice on 17.02009 and again submitted a reply on 17.02010. However, referring to the enquiry report the penalty order dated 07.10.2011 was passed and the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed on 10.01.2013.

(3.) Contending that the enquiry report is bereft of foundational facts and it does not disclose how a finding has been arrived by the enquiring officer that an amount of Rs.19,16,906/- is recoverable from the petitioner, Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the penalty order dated 07.10.2011 which has been passed on the basis of such an enquiry report is liable to be quashed. Another contention raised by the petitioner is, that the appellate order has been passed in breach of the rules of natural justice.