PATNA, India, Aug. 19 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on July 21:

Heard Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, learned SC-5 for the State.

2. The challenge in the present writ petition is made to the order no. 92/2018-19, as contained in Memo No. 01- 1490/Estab., Buxar dated 10.09.2018, issued by the District Magistrate, Buxar, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service and further restrained from any future appointment under the Government. Besides, he is held not entitled for any benefits, except subsistence allowance for the period of suspension. The petitioner is further aggrieved with the order dated 07.02.2020, in Service Appeal No. 190/2018, issued by the Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner came to be rejected and the order of disciplinary authority, aforenoted, is duly affirmed. The enquiry report is also under challenge, on the ground of being based on no evidence.

3. The briefly stated facts of the case are the petitioner was duly appointed on compassionate ground as Revenue Clerk and while he was discharging the duty in Circle Office, Navanagar, Buxar, a complaint was made by one Rajesh Kumar Singh alleging illegal demand of gratification. Based on such complaint, a Trap team was constituted and on 30.08.2016 the petitioner was caught red handed while allegedly receiving bribe of Rs.9000/- from one Ajay Kumar. The aforesaid incident led to institution of an F.I.R., bearing Vigilance P.S. Case No. 83 of 2016 dated 30.08.2016 for the offences punishable under Section 7/13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

4. On 07.09.2016, the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna requested the District Magistrate, Buxar to take action as per Rule 99 of the Bihar Service Code. The petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 19.09.2016 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) with effect from the date of his arrest. Further direction was given to the Circle Officer, Navanagar, Baxar to ensure service of a Memo of Charge along with the evidence. Meanwhile, the petitioner was granted bail vide order dated 02.11.2016.

5. A Departmental proceeding was initiated vide Order no. 118/2016-17 dated 15.11.2016. The Deputy Development Welfare Commissioner, Buxar was appointed as the Conducting officer whereas the Circle Officer, Navanagar, Buxar as the Presenting officer. The Memo of charge was duly served upon the petitioner and was asked to submit his showcause, vide Annexure-5 to the writ petition. In response to the letter aforenoted, the petitioner submitted application requesting therein to supply necessary documents. The date of hearing rescheduled, however the petitioner again submitted application for non-supply of documents. Finally, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply on 31.03.2017 denying all the charges. Upon completion of the enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted enquiry report finding the charges proved against the petitioner. The petitioner was served with the second show-cause notice. On request of the petitioner, some relevant documents were provided to him, thereupon the petitioner submitted a detailed show-cause reply. The District Magistrate, Buxar whereupon vide order dated 10.09.2018 inflicted the punishment of dismissal from service as well as restricted from future appointment under any Government service and also ordered that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any other benefits, except subsistence allowance for the suspension period.

6. The petitioner aggrieved with the order of dismissal preferred Service Appeal No. 190 of 2018 before the Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna, however, the same did not find any favour and the appeal was rejected.

The rest of the document can be viewed at https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjMjQxMCMyMDIxIzEjTg==-gPIMCnGB6sk=

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.