PATNA, India, April 23 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on March 23:

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the Notification No.2039 dated 25.10.2024 issued by the Deputy Secretary by which the punishment has been imposed against the petitioner for withholding of 20% of pension for three years. Further prayer has been made for quashing the letter No.2556 dated 08.11.2022 by which the second show-cause notice has been issued against the petitioner by which inspite of the fact that inquiry officer appointed by the Departmental Authorities, on the basis of material available on record, petitioner was not found guilty from the charges levelled against him. Third prayer has been made for quashing the showcause notice (Prapatra- Ka) as contained in resolution No.1129 dated 07.06.2019. Further prayer has been made to quash the entire departmental proceeding conducted against the petitioner on account of illegal order with direction to make payment of entire amount of pension along with statutory interest @ 18 % per annum along with any other consequential benefits for which the petitioner is entitled.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the year 2017, the petitioner was posted as Assistant Engineer, Bagmati, Sub-Division-3, Sheohar (Bagmati Right Bank 45.3 - 52.92 KM) and was given extra additional charge of Bagmati Sub-Division Piprahi (Bagmati Right Bank 15.240 - 32.705 KM), Bagmati Sub-Division No.1, Sheohar ( 32.705 - 38.825 KM) and also extra additional incharge of Flood Control Cell during that period.

4. Counsel further submits that Prapatra-Ka has been issued against the petitioner vide letter No.2019 dated 15.11.2017, in which certain charges were levelled against the petitioner. He further submits that soon after receiving the showcause notice, the petitioner has filed his reply with all materials, but he was very surprised that after about one and half year, the department has issued another Resolution No.1129 dated 07.06.2019 by which another Prapatra-Ka has been issued against the petitioner and they had decided to initiate departmental proceeding against the petitioner. 5. Counsel further submits that memo of charge was vague and some of the charges were substituted with predetermined mind. He further submits that after six months of the proceeding, the department has appointed new Conducting Officer on 30.12.2019 who has submitted inquiry report on 13.01.2020 and found not guilty and in this regard, submitted report vide letter No.53 dated 16.03.2020. He further submits that after about two years 8 months, another letter was issued on 08.11.2022 by which the Disciplinary Authority was differing from the report submitted by the Inquiry Officer directed to take steps for examination and cross-examination.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjMzYxIzIwMjUjMSNO-Yf7aGIoSNDM=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.