Patna High Court
Subhash Kumar Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 3 January, 2024
Author: Mohit Kumar Shah
Bench: Mohit Kumar Shah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5518 of 2022
======================================================
Subhash Kumar Yadav son of Lalbabu Prasad Yadav, resident of Village-
Bhawalpur, P.S. Madhaura, P.O. Nautan, District- Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.
3. Additional D.G. of Police, Bihar Special Armed Police, Bihar, Patna.
4. D.I.G. of Police, Bihar Special Armed Police, Northern Zone, Muzaffarpur.
5. Commandant, Bihar Special Armed Police- 6, Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Hriday Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Md.N.H.Khan (Sc1)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 03-01-2024
1. The present writ petition has been filed for
quashing the order dated 11.06.2021, passed by the
Commandant, Bihar State Arms Police-6, Muzaffarpur, whereby
and whereunder the petitioner has been inflicted with the
punishment of withholding of wage increments for a period of
two years, equals to three Black Marks. The petitioner has also
assailed the appellate order dated 04.01.2022, passed by the
Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bihar Special Armed
Police, Northern Zone, Muzaffarpur i.e. the respondent no.04,
whereby and whereunder the appeal, filed by the petitioner has
been rejected.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5518 of 2022 dt.03-01-2024
2/5
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner
was appointed as a constable in BMP-6, now known as Bihar
Special Armed Police-6 on 30.07.2008. While the petitioner was
working to the satisfaction of all concerned, a chargesheet was
issued qua the petitioner herein on 07.09.2020, inter alia
alleging therein that the petitioner was responsible for
provoking the constables, when one constable, namely, Rajesh
Chandra had made an attempt to commit suicide at the special
isolation ward as also for closing the office and mess of the
camp in question. The petitioner had then filed his reply denying
all the charges whereupon the Inquiry Officer had conducted an
inquiry and submitted an inquiry report dated 24.05.2021,
finding the charges to have been proved qua the petitioner
herein. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority, i.e. the respondent
no.05 had passed the order of punishment dated 11.06.2021,
which was assailed by the petitioner by filing an appeal,
however, the same has also been dismissed by the respondent
no.04 by an order dated 04.01.2022.
3. The short issue raised by the petitioner for
assailing the impugned orders dated 11.06.2021 and 04.01.2022,
is that neither a copy of the inquiry report has been served upon
the petitioner nor any second show-cause notice has been served
Patna High Court CWJC No.5518 of 2022 dt.03-01-2024
3/5
upon the petitioner, resulting in denial of reasonable opportunity
to the petitioner to prove his innocence, which also amounts to
breach of the principles of the natural justice, hence the entire
inquiry proceedings, culminating into passing of the punishment
order dated 11.06.2021 and the appellate order dated 04.01.2022
are vitiated in the eyes of law, thus should be set aside.
4. Per contra, though the learned counsel for the
respondent-State has though opposed the present writ petition,
however, upon instructions, he submits that neither a copy of the
Inquiry Report was ever served upon the petitioner nor any
second show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner, with
regard to the inquiry proceedings in question, hence the matter
be remanded back to the disciplinary authority from the stage of
submission of the Inquiry Report by the Inquiry Officer.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the materials on record, from which this Court finds
that neither the enquiry report, indicting the petitioner has been
served upon the petitioner nor the second show cause notice has
been issued to the petitioner, thus the petitioner has been denied
a reasonable opportunity to put forth his defence and prove his
innocence, resulting in breach of the principles of natural justice
and violation of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India,
Patna High Court CWJC No.5518 of 2022 dt.03-01-2024
4/5
hence, the entire enquiry proceedings, from the stage of
submission of Inquiry Report, being unfair, unjust and illegal
stands vitiated in the eyes of law. Reference in this regard be
had to a judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Union of India vs. Mohd. Ramzan Khan, reported in
(1991) 1 SCC 588 as also to the Constitution Bench judgment,
rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Managing
Director, ECIL Hyderabad vs. B. Karunakar and others
reported in (1993) 4 SCC 727.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case and for the reasons mentioned herein, I deem it fit and
proper to quash the impugned order of punishment dated
11.06.2021
, passed by the Commandant, Bihar Special Armed
Police-6, Muzaffarpur, inflicting the punishment of withholding
the wage increment for two years as also the appellate order
dated 04.01.2022, passed by the Deputy Inspector General of
Police, Bihar Special Armed Police, Northern Zone,
Muzaffarpur and remit the matter back to the disciplinary
authority with liberty to proceed afresh from the stage of
issuance of second show cause notice. It is needless to state that
the payment of consequential benefits shall abide by the final
outcome of the fresh disciplinary proceedings to be conducted
Patna High Court CWJC No.5518 of 2022 dt.03-01-2024
by the disciplinary authority, as aforesaid.
7. The writ petition stands allowed to the aforesaid
extent.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
Saurav/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 16.01.2024
Transmission Date NA
