Alok Kumar vs The Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 5051 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.30 of 2021
     ======================================================

Alok Kumar S/o Kumar Vishwanath, R/o-Village-Chamanagaradh-ithari, P.O.-Kalarampur, P.S.-Nayaramnagar, District-Munger, Bihar, PIn-811211.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The Union of India through its Managing Director Food Corporation of India, Head Qatar New Delhi.

2. The Executive Director (South) FCI Zonal Office, Chennai.

3. The General Manager (Telangana) FCI, Regional Office, Hyderabad, Haca Bhawan III rd Floor, Public Garden Road Nampally, Hyderabad.

4. The Dy General Manager (PERS) FCI Zonal Ofice, Chennai.

5. The Divisional Manager Food Corporation of India Divisional Office, Warangal.

6. The Assistant General Manager (PERS) and Diciplinary Authority Divisional Office, Warangal.

7. The Area Managaer District Office Venkatadri Nagar, Kazipet, Warangal, Andhra Pradesh Pin-506003

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjit Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. K.N. Singh, ASG Mr. Anshuman Singh, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 27-10-2021

Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and State.

2. In the instant case, the petitioner has challenged the

impugned alleged charge-sheet vide Vig. Memorandum No.

4(2)k/2020 dated 21.08.2020 issued by the Assistant General

Manager (PERS) & Disciplinary Authority which is annexed as

Annexure-10.

3. Time and again, the Apex Court has held in respect of

challenge to charge memo Court can interfere only on legal ground Patna High Court CWJC No.30 of 2021 dt.27-10-2021

like competency or violation of statutory provision. In the present

case, the petitioner has not pointed out any legal issue so as to

interfere with the charge memo.

4. The Apex Court in the case of Union of India and

Another vs. Kunisetty Satyanarayana reported in (2006) 12

SCC 28 has held that ordinarily writ courts cannot entertain the

challenge to charge memo in the absence of violation or any

statutory provision.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed in the

light of the Apex Court judgment in the case of Kunisetty

Satyanarayana (supra).

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

AFR/NAFR              N/A
CAV DATE              N/A
Uploading Date        29.10.2021
Transmission Date     N/A