PATNA, India, Aug. 4 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on July 15:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief/s :-
"(i) For quashing order dated 01.03.2016 passed in service Appeal Case No. 13/2015 passed by Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga whereby the appeal preferred by petitioner against the order dated 01.06.2015 has been rejected on non-est grounds.
(ii) Four quashing order contained in Memo No. 535 dated 01.06.2015 passed by District Magistrate Samastipur, whereby punishment of stoppage of promotion has been given to the petitioner on nonest ground (iii) For any other/relief/reliefs for which petitioner may be found to be entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(iv) The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the enquiry report dated 27.01.2015 submitted by Additional Collector, Departmental Enquiry, Samastipur, whereby the enquiry officer has proved all the charges against the petitioner in a complete illegal, arbitrary and unauthorized manner. (v) In consequence thereof, for issuance of writ/writs of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to grant all consequential benefits admissible to petitioner."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Lower Division Clerk/Assistant in the Collectorate cadre in the district of Samastipur on 02.04.1985. Over time, the petitioner was posted as an Upper Division Clerk in the District Revenue Section, Samastipur. It is further submitted that vide Memo No. 892 dated 18.09.2014, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the District Magistrate, Samastipur, alleging carelessness and indiscipline, particularly in relation to delay in issuance of letters pursuant to orders passed by the authorities. The said show cause notice enumerated 124 instances of such delay and also pointed out the petitioner's failure to record entries in the institution registers. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner submitted his show cause explanation on 25.09.2014. However, disregarding the explanation, a departmental proceeding was initiated vide Memo No. 1016 dated 16.10.2014, whereby charges were framed against the petitioner in Prapatra 'Ka' and a Conducting Officer and Presenting Officer were appointed. The departmental enquiry was thereafter conducted. The petitioner duly participated in the enquiry proceedings and filed his reply before the Enquiry Officer. However, without giving due consideration to the petitioner's reply and explanation, a report dated 27.01.2015 was submitted, holding both charges proved against the petitioner.
The rest of the document can be viewed at https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjOTI4MyMyMDE2IzEjTg==-ozNpmKE3m7Q=
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
