LAWS(JHAR)-2019-8-17

RINKI DEVI Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On August 22, 2019
Rinki Devi Appellant
V/S
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, in this writ application, has prayed for quashing the order contained in Memo No.2844 dated 05.09.2013 issued by the Superintendent of Police Chatra, by which the husband of petitioner has been dismissed from service. She has further prayed to quash the order contained in Memo No.309/D dated 23.07.2015 by which the appeal of the husband of the petitioner was rejected. Petitioner has also prayed for quashing the order No.7121 dated 03.12.2015 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Home Department, by which the mercy appeal preferred by the petitioner's husband has been rejected.

(2.) Facts, in brief, which gave rise to filing of this writ application are that the husband of the petitioner, who was appointed as constable in the State of Jharkhand was proceeded against for charges of negligence and indiscipline and a chargesheet was issued to him vide memo No.4441 dated 25.12.2012 in departmental proceeding No.07/13. He was put under suspension vide order No.2041/12 dated 18.12.2012 with immediate effect. As per the chargesheet issued to the petitioner's husband, it was alleged that he, while posted at Kunda, Chatra, on 11.12.2012, had consumed alcohol with two persons of Kunda Village in Guard Room. Thereafter, he took his rifle and a loaded rifle of Constable Sanjay Kumar and went towards Kunda Village in drunken state. When other police personnel objected to such act, he threatened to assault them. He abused the senior police officers and threatened to file case against them in the Court after resigning from service. The Officer-in-Charge, Kunda along with a team of police personnel went to search out the petitioner's husband and in course of their search, they saw that petitioner's husband in the dark night coming from Kunda Village in a drunken state with two rifles. Rifle and cartridges were seized and he was sent to police line, Chatra. Inspector of Police, Semaria Circle, Chatra was appointed as conducting officer to conduct the departmental proceeding. After receipt of chargesheet, petitioner's husband had submitted his show cause before the enquiry officer denying the charges. Departmental proceeding was conducted wherein statement of witnesses were recorded and on completion of the same, enquiry report was submitted on 15.07.2013, wherein the enquiry officer has recorded that the charges against the petitioner's husband are proved. Upon submission of the enquiry report, a second show cause notice was issued to the petitioner's husband vide memo No.2551 dated 12.08.2013 by the Superintendent of Police, Chatra. Petitioner's husband had submitted his reply to the second show cause notice. Thereafter the Superintendent of Police, Chatra vide order contained in Memo No.2844 dated 05.09.2013 has imposed a punishment of dismissal from service with immediate effect. Petitioner's husband filed an appeal memorial before the Director General of Police and Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand, which also stood rejected vide order contained in Memo No.309/D dated 23.07.2015 passed by the Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi. Before rejection of the appeal memorial, petitioner's husband had died due to cancer on 17.06.2015. The petitioner thus had preferred a mercy appeal before the State of Jharkhand, but, the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Home, vide communication dated 03.12.2015 as contained in letter No.7121 has rejected the said mercy appeal on the ground that since the employee has died, his appeal cannot be entertained.

(3.) The State has filed counter affidavit stating that the husband of the petitioner has committed grave act of indiscipline for which, a departmental proceeding was initiated and finding him guilty of misconduct, proper punishment was awarded. It was mentioned that in the departmental proceeding there is no flaw and considering the enquiry report, the punishment order has been passed. It is also mentioned that the appeal was also dismissed after proper consideration.