JUDGMENT

1. The instant case has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID 19 Pandemic, requiring social distancing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 03.03.2015 passed by the respondent no. 6 i.e. the Senior Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur and the order dated 13.3.2015 passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna whereby and where-under, the petitioner has been dismissed from service w.e.f. 3.3.2015. The petitioner has also challenged the appellate order dated 18.8.2015, by which the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur has rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner herein as well as the order passed by the Director General of Police, Patna, dated 25.10.2017 whereby and where-under the memorial submitted by the petitioner has been rejected.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a constable and was discharging his duty to the satisfaction of all concerned. In the year 2011, the petitioner was deputed as bodyguard of MLA, Baruraj namely Shri Brij Kishore Singh. While the petitioner was deputed as the Bodyguard of the aforesaid M.L.A. in the year 2011, one FIR bearing Ahiyapur PS. Case No. 323 of 2011 dated 11.9.2011 was filed by one Jitendra Kumar Singh, alleging therein that the petitioner had received a sum of Rs. 1,42,000/- from the candidates participating in the selection process being conducted by the police in order to help them to pass the medical test. The petitioner was arrested and it is alleged that a sum of Rs. 40,000/- was recovered from the petitioner.

4. Thereafter, a memo of charge dated 18.12.2011 was served upon the petitioner inter alia alleging therein that the petitioner had taken illicit money from the selected candidates appearing in the police selection process for the purposes of ensuring that they pass in the medical test. The petitioner had then submitted his reply inter alia submitting therein that since the criminal proceeding was pending, the departmental proceeding be kept in abeyance till disposal of the criminal case and moreover, it was also submitted that the allegations were totally fabricated and frivolous inasmuch as he did not know either the informant or any of the selected candidates and secondly the Officer-In-charge of Ahiyapur police station had arrested the petitioner on account of his personal grudge and the Investigating Officer had then coerced him to take out a sum of Rs. 40,000/- by using ATM Card from SBI ATM machine situated at MIT Muzaffarpur and then a false seizure list was prepared.

5. It is the allegation of the petitioner that all of a sudden, without any notice regarding conduct of the departmental proceeding, a purported second show cause notice dated 07.02.2015 was served upon the petitioner wherein, the enquiry report was also annexed. Thereafter, the impugned order of dismissal of the petitioner from service dated 3.3.2015 and 13.3.2015 were issued, which was challenged by the petitioner in appeal, however, the appeal was also dismissed by an order dated 18.8.2015. The petitioner had also filed a memorial but the same was also rejected vide order dated 25.10.2017.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the principle of natural justice has not been complied with inasmuch as the departmental proceeding has been held behind the back of the petitioner. It is next submitted that the order impugned dismissing the petitioner from his service dated 3.3.2015 and 13.3.2015 have been passed without proper application of mind and no reason has been furnished in support of the decision to dismiss the petitioner from his service, hence, the impugned orders dated 3.3.2015 and 13.3.2015 are vitiated in the eyes of law. In this connection, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a judgement rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, reported in (2010) 9 SCC 496 (K