Jharkhand High Court
Braj Kishore Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 12 June, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 2490 of 2020
---
Braj Kishore Singh ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Fisheries,
Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and
Fisheries, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
4. The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribag
.... ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Awnish Shankar, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Sr. S.C.-III
Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, A.C. to Sr.S.C.-III
Order No. 05 Dated: 12.06.2023
The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of
direction upon the respondent no. 2-the Secretary, Department of
Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, Government of Jharkhand to drop
the departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner under
rule 43(b) of Jharkhand Pension Rules, 2000 pursuant to memo of
charge dated 05.02.2003 issued by the respondent no. 2 as
contained in memo no. 385 dated 08.02.2003.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to
issuance of memo of charge dated 05.02.2003, an inquiry was
conducted by the Deputy Secretary, Department of Animal
Husbandry and Fisheries, Government of Jharkhand (the
respondent no. 3) and the report was submitted by him to the
Principal Secretary on 31.08.2008, however no decision has yet
been taken by the disciplinary authority.
3. Mrs. Vandana Singh, learned Sr.S.C.-III appearing on behalf of
the respondents, while referring to paragraph-21 of the counter
affidavit, submits that initially 90% of the pension was
provisionally sanctioned to the petitioner vide departmental letter
no. 1884 dated 12.07.2003. Remaining 10 % of the pension, full
gratuity and leave encashment were also sanctioned in favour of
the petitioner vide departmental notification no. 1744 dated
01.12.2015 in the light of order dated 28.08.2007 passed by this
Court in L.P.A. No. 714 of 2004 (Dr. Dudhnath Pandey Vs. The
State of Jharkhand & Ors.) as well as the order dated 14.08.2013
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6770 of
2013 [arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) No. 1427 of 2009] with Civil
Appeal No. 6771 of 2013 [arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) No. 1428 of
2009].
4. It has been stated in paragraph-23 of the said counter
affidavit that a final decision will be taken by the department in
the pending departmental proceeding against the petitioner
considering the report submitted by the inquiry officer and the
judgment dated 03.08.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-1st
Class, Hazaribagh in G.R. No. 1648/2002 arising out of Sadar P.S.
Case No. 262/2002 (T.R. No. 1738/2018) as well as on the basis of
outcome of Certificate Case No. 13 of 2002-03.
5. Learned Sr.S.C.-III further submits that so far as the said
certificate case is concerned, the same is still pending.
6. This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that the age of the
petitioner was about 79 years at the time of filing of the writ
petition in the year 2020 and therefore his present age is about 82
years. The inquiry report was already submitted by the inquiry
officer i.e., respondent no. 3 on 31.08.2008 and therefore, not
taking appropriate decision by the disciplinary authority for such a
long period amounts to harassing the petitioner.
7. Under the said circumstance, the disciplinary authority is
directed to take appropriate decision in this regard within six
weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Ritesh/
