Jharkhand High Court
Manoj Kumar vs The Commissioner on 12 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Civil Review No. 36 of 2019
Manoj Kumar --- --- Petitioner
Versus
1. The Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, G.B. Nagar, Noida (UP)
2. The Deputy Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Regional Office,
Patna
3. Sri (Dr.) Dayashankar Kumar, Deputy Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya
Samiti, Regional Office, Patna
4. Sri G. Arumugam, Deputy Commissioner (Acad) / C.V.O, Navodaya
Vidyalaya Samiti, G.B. Nagar, Noida (UP)
5. Sri B.C. Panda, Public Information Officer / Vigilance Officer, Navodaya
Vidyalaya Samiti, G.B. Nagar, Noida (UP) --- --- Respondents
---
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary
---
For the Petitioner: In person
---
06 / 12.05.2022 Matter has been taken up on being mentioned by the petitioner in person.
Surviving defects are ignored on the request of the petitioner in person. Since
defects have been ignored, peremptory order dated 21.04.2022 shall not take
effect.
2. We have heard the petitioner in person.
3. Petitioner seeks review of the judgment dated 07.03.2019 passed in W.P (S)
No. 4471/2018 which reads as under:
"1. When the matter is called out, nobody appears on behalf of the
petitioner.
2. Looking to the order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal,
Patna Bench, Circuit Bench, Ranchi in O.A. No.050/00496/2018, it
appears that memorandum of charges was issued upon the
petitioner and he was suspended on 20th March, 2017. The
Disciplinary Authority has issued charge sheet dated 24/27th
March, 2017. It further appears from the facts of the case that
suspension order as well as order of issuance of charge sheet was
under challenge. The suspension order dated 20th March, 2017
was issued by Disciplinary Authority i.e. Deputy Commissioner
(Acad) NVS, R.O. Bhopal. The charges levelled against this
petitioner is that his behaviour and conduct is unmindful of the
official decorum and in violation of Conduct Rules and, therefore,
he was issued charge sheet. The charges and misconduct which
this petitioner has committed on different dates have been
mentioned in detail at Page 29 of this writ petition.
3. It appears that the suspension order was passed by competent
authority namely Deputy Commissioner (Acad) NVS, R.O.
Bhopal. Even memorandum of charges have been issued by the
very same authority. At the relevant time, he was working at
Bhopal, hence, no error has been committed by Central
Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Circuit Bench, Ranchi
while deciding the O.A. No.050/00496/2018 vide judgment and
order dated 6th August, 2018.
4. Hence, there is no substance in this writ petition and the same is
therefore, dismissed."
4. Learned Writ Court refused to interfere in the order of learned CAT, Patna
Bench, Circuit Bench, Ranchi dated 06.08.2018 passed in O.A. No.
050/00496/2018, dismissing the Original Application wherein the applicant /
petitioner herein had challenged the Memorandum of Charges. It is not in dispute
that the petitioner was served with the Memorandum of Charges while he was
posted at Chhindwara Navodaya Vidyalaya in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The
order of punishment was not under challenge by the applicant before he learned
CAT, Patna Bench, Circuit Bench, Ranchi. Learned Writ Court after examining the
case of the petitioner, held that at the relevant point of time, applicant was working
at Bhopal. Therefore, there was no error in the impugned order passed by the
learned CAT.
5. In support of the prayer for review, petitioner has submitted that the writ
petition was decided against the principles of natural justice without taking into
consideration certain averments in the writ petition vide Annexures-1 & 2.
Annexures-1 & 2 of the writ petition are forwarding of complaint of the applicant
to the Chief Vigilance Officer, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Gautam Budh Nagar,
Uttar Pradesh and office order of the Deputy Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya
Samiti, Bhopal, wherein an Assistant Commissioner was deputed to conduct an
inquiry on the complaint of the applicant / petitioner. These two documents do not
improve the case of the petitioner since no cause of action had arisen within the
territorial jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand for the applicant to assail the
Memorandum of Charges before the learned CAT at Circuit Bench, Ranchi and
before this Court in the writ petition. Petitioner in person also informs that
punishment order of reduction of one increment was passed while he was posted at
Chhindwara in Madhya Pradesh. No part of cause of action fell within the
territorial jurisdiction of this Court or the learned CAT, Patna Bench, Circuit
Bench, Ranchi. The Writ Court on being satisfied with this aspect of the matter,
did not find any reason to interfere in the order of learned CAT.
6. We do not find any ground made out for review of the order. This Review
petition is accordingly dismissed. However, petitioner is at liberty to approach the
Forum where his cause of action may lie, if permissible in law and the provision of
Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J)
Ranjeet/
