Hardeo Singh vs State of Bihar and Others

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.—The Petitioner was proceeded in the departmental proceeding. He was suspended and then charge sheeted vide Memo dated 9th October, 1996. After the enquiry, he having punished with major punishment of reduction in rank, has challenged the impugned order, contained in Memo No. 21 dated 5th January, 1999, as issued by the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

The main plea of the Petitioner is that the Respondents issued the order of punishment without hearing him. No date of hearing was fixed, nor any oral hearing was given. No examination or cross-examination of the witness made nor allowed to the Petitioner. Without supplying the copy of the enquiry report, the impugned order was passed in violation of rules of natural justice.

The Respondents in their counter affidavit have taken plea that the Petitioner, who was a Head Master, accepted joining of an outsider (Lakshman Prasad Sah) on the basis of a fake and fabricated appointment letter, as a teacher of the school. Subsequently, he disobeyed the order of the higher authority and made payment in favour of such forged appointee.

The fact, as alleged by the Petitioner that he was not given any opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry no date of enquiry was fixed no witnesses were examined or cross-examined; and the copy of the enquiry report was not served, has not been disputed in the counter affidavit.

From the charge sheet, as contained in Annexure-3, it will be evident that the appointment of one Shri Lakshman Prasad Sah was alleged to be forged and allegation against Petitioner was that the joining of said Shri Sah should not have been accepted without prior approval of the Controlling Officer. Though such allegation made, neither the list of witnesses nor the list of evidences shown to bring home such charges.

Admittedly, the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur is not the appointing authority of Petitioner, but he passed the impugned order on 5th January, 1999, without approval of the appropriate Establishment Committee.

In the aforesaid background, there being no proceeding held, in accordance with law, and the order having passed in violation of natural justice, that too such authority having no such jurisdiction, I set aside the order, contained in Memo No. 21 dated 5th January, 1999.

However, this order will not stand in the way of the Respondents to pass any order, in accordance with law of Bihar Pension Rules.

The writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid observations.