ARUN KUMAR MANDAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) THOUGH by order dated 7.4.2006, the respondents -State was directed to file counter affidavit, but no such counter affidavit has been filed as yet. Learned counsel for the State submitted that he is prepared to argue the case on merit even without any counter affidavit since counter affidavit would not be required in the fact and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, this writ petition is being disposed of with the consent of the parties at the stage of admission itself.

(3.) THE petitioner, in the meantime, retired from service on 31.3.2001. It appears that after the retirement of the petitioner from service on 11.8.2001 a notice to show cause was issued to him asking to show cause regarding the recommendation made by the Enquiry Officer in the proceeding initiated. When no reply was received, another show cause notice dated 19.2.2002 was issued to the petitioner vide Annexure -3 to show cause to which the petitioner replied vide Annexure -4. Thereafter, it appears that the respondents issued an office order as contained in Annexure -1 dated 22.8.2003 whereby the concerned authorities partially modified/ amended the earlier order of punishment dated 4.1.1997 and awarded the punishment of break -in -service in between the ' period 26.9.1994 to 12.9.1996 declaring it to be un -authorized absence of the petitioner and thereby awarded punishment of withholding one increment.