Vijay Kumar vs The Honble High Court Of ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5267 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12693 of 2019
     ======================================================

Vijay Kumar, Son of Late Ramnandan Das, Village- Jalgovind Chowk, P.S.- Barh, District - Patna, 803213.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The Honble High court of Judicature, at Patna. Patna.

2. District and Sessions Judge, Patna.

3. Additional Sessions Judge, Barh cum Enquiry Officer ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Surya Nilambari, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Piyush Lall, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 17-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the

following reliefs:-

"(i) Directing the Respondent Authority to produce the order whereby the memo of appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of dismissal dated 12.05.2014, came to be rejected and of which order only a communication dated 14.03.2019, issued under the signature of the Registrar (Admin) addressed to the learned District and Sessions Judge, Patna, was forwarded to the petitioner.

(ii) Upon production of the said order passed in the appeal preferred by the Petitioner, against the order dated 12.05.2014 whereby the Petitioner was dismissed from service by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Patna, to quash the same;

(iii) To quash the order dated 12.05.2014 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Patna whereby the Petitioner was dismissed from service for proved misconduct; Patna High Court CWJC No.12693 of 2019 dt.17-11-2021

(iv) To quash the second show cause notice dated 11.12.2013 as being bad in law;

(v) That the petitioner may be reinstated in service with consequential benefits and that the Petitioner may be paid subsistence allowance for the period between April, 2009 till 12.05.2014 (date of dismissal)."

The petitioner entered into service of the Subordinate

Court as a Class-IV employee on 02.07.1987. He was placed under

suspension on the allegations that when he was on duty a sum of

Rs. 1,33,304/- was stolen from Nazarat Office, Civil Court, Barh.

Barh P.S. Case No. 542 of 1993 was registered and simultaneously

departmental proceeding was initiated by District & Sessions

Judge, Patna against one Sri Indu Bhushan Pandey, the then Nazir

and petitioner-Vijay Kumar, the then Night Guard posted in Barh

Civil Court. The petitioner was convicted in the criminal

proceedings and it was subject matter of Cr. Rev. No. 11 of 2013 in

which he was acquitted on 29.07.2013 whereas in the departmental

proceedings the Inquiring Officer has submitted a report on

15.07.1995 in which it is held that charges levelled against the

petitioner was proved.

In the light of the aforesaid factual aspect the

disciplinary authority by its order No. 62 of 2014 dismissed the

petitioner from service on 12.05.2014. Petitioner filed CWJC No.

12367 of 2014 against the order of dismissal and it was disposed Patna High Court CWJC No.12693 of 2019 dt.17-11-2021

off as petitioner had alternative remedy of appeal, thus, he

preferred memorandum of appeal. Appeal was stated to have been

decided by the Hon'ble Committee, High Court of Patna and it

was rejected. The same was communicated to the petitioner on

14.03.2019, however, copy of the Committee's decision in

rejecting the memorandum of appeal was not furnished or

forwarded to the petitioner along with impugned communication

dated 14.03.2019, thus, the petitioner has presented this petition.

The petitioner was dismissed from service and preferred

appeal before the appellate authority. It is learnt that appellate

authority is consisting of a committee and committee has rejected

the petitioner's memorandum of appeal dated 12.12.2016 and such

rejection or appeal was communicated to the petitioner on

14.03.2019 by the Registrar (Admn.). Decision of the Committee

on merit in deciding the memorandum of appeal has not been

communicated to the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner first prayer

reads as under:-

"(i) Directing the Respondent Authority to produce the order whereby the memo of appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of dismissal dated 12.05.2014, came to be rejected and of which order only a communication dated 14.03.2019, issued under the signature of the Registrar (Admin) addressed to the learned District and Sessions Judge, Patna, was forwarded to the petitioner."

Patna High Court CWJC No.12693 of 2019 dt.17-11-2021

In the light of these facts and circumstances and the fact

that respondent counsel has not disputed that the petitioner has not

been provided decision of the Committee and only communication

dated 14.03.2019 has been served in which it is intimated that the

petitioner's appeal was rejected.

In order to make effective petition, the contents of

appellate authority decision on the memorandum of appeal is

required to be furnished thereby the petitioner has been denied

opportunity or meeting the grounds for rejection of appeal in this

petition, on this short ground, Annexure-8 dated 14.03.2019 is set

aside and writ petition is allowed.

The concerned respondent is hereby directed to

communicate the decision on the memorandum of appeal dated

12.12.2016 viz. the Appellate authority (committee) decision to the

petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of

this order. Thereafter, the petitioner is at liberty to question the

validity of the disciplinary/appellate authority order/decision.

With the aforesaid observations, the present petition

stands allowed.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) Vikash/-

AFR/NAFR              NAFR
CAV DATE              N/A
Uploading Date        22.11.2021
Transmission Date     N/A