HIT NARAYAN JHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, aggrieved with the punishment of dismissal from service vide order dated 17.12.2002 and the appellate order dated 31.12.2003 confirming the punishment, approached the writ Court, however, without success. By an order dated 08.02.2018 the writ petition has been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated, the petitioner, on an allegation that on threat of posting the Driver-Havildar Sham Barla on general duty outside the Headquarters he has received Rs. 3,000.00 through Havildar Rajendra Ravidas, was proceeded against departmentally. At the material point of time, the appellant was working as an ASI with JAP-4, Bokaro. During the departmental proceeding, the department has examined four witnesses in support of charge framed against the appellant. The enquiring officer submitted a report on 30.04.2002 holding the charge framed against the appellant proved and primarily on the basis of the enquiry report the disciplinary authority has inflicted punishment of dismissal from service, as per order dated 17.12002 and, as noticed above, the appellant's appeal has been dismissed by an order dated 31.12003.

(3.) Contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that a charge of illegal gratification, even in a departmental proceeding, must be proved to the hilt and merely on ipse-dixit of the enquiring officer the extreme punishment of dismissal from service cannot be awarded.