SUBHAS KUMAR SUMAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State and with their consent this writ application is being disposed of at this stage itself.

(2.) THE petitioner while serving as constable in Dhanbad Railway Police, was served with memo of charge by the Superintendent of Police, Railway Police, Dhanbad, alleging that he did not report to his duty with his ammunition on 18.6.1998 and on 19.6.1998 in spite of specific order and instead of that he under the influence of liquor entered into a quarrel with shopkeepers Vijay Tiwari and Vikash Agarwal and used abusive language. The petitioner was asked to show cause, which was submitted by him, wherein he took a plea that on the alleged date of occurrence, he was under medical supervision and he was suffering from vomiting and stomach trouble. The show cause of the petitioner was not found satisfactory and thereafter a departmental enquiry was initiated against him, in which the petitioner also participated and on the basis of the evidence and material on record, the Enquiry Officer found the charges against the petitioner to be established and then he Submitted his report. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority i.e. the Superintendent of Police on consideration of facts and materials placed before him passed an order on 31.7.1999 dismissing the petitioner from service. The petitioner thereafter preferred appeal before the Deputy Inspector of Police, Railway, but the same was also dismissed by order dated 6.6.2000. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ application challenging the order of his dismissal passed by the Disciplinary Authority as well as the order of the appellate authority affirming the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority.

(3.) FROM perusal of the impugned order passed by the Disciplinary Authority dismissing the petitioner from service as well as the appellate order, I find that both the authorities have considered the evidence and materials on record as well as the enquiry report and then arrived on the findings of facts that the charges against the petitioner were fully proved.