A departmental proceeding must adhere to the rules, prove charges based on evidence, and ensure the rights of the accused are upheld.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Sr. counsel, duly assisted by Mr. Rajesh Kumar learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vivek Prasad, learned Government Pleader No.7, for the State.

2. By filing the present writ application, the petitioner is seeking quashing of the order, contained in Notification No.1919 dated 03.09.2019, issued under the signature of respondent Additional Secretary to the Government, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, whereby the petitioner was awarded with a punishment of stoppage of total pension under Rule 43(b) of Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. The petitioner further sought quashing of the order contained in Notification No. 179 dated 06.02.2020, issued under the signature of respondent Additional Secretary to the Government, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected and the punishment awarded was upheld.

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the undisputed facts which are relevant for consideration of the issues are the petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Engineer in Water Resources Department on 31.01.1979 and after serving more than 36 years, he superannuated on 31.03.2015 from the post of Executive Engineer. During the service period, a criminal case, bearing Economic Offence Unit Case No. 36 of 2013 dated 13.08.2013 was registered for the offences under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, with an imputation that the properties were found disproportionate to his known source of income along with the properties of his wife and, as such, the properties of the petitioner and his wife were confiscated by learned Authorized Officer, Patna.

4. The Economic Offence Unit, Bihar, Patna vide letter no.232 dated 02.09.2013 informed the Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna of lodging of the aforesaid case and on the basis thereof the petitioner was put under suspension vide notification as contained in memo no.138 dated 27.01.2014 in contemplation of departmental proceeding. Vide resolution contained in memo no.281 dated 07.03.2014, the departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner under Rule 17 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred as ‘Bihar CCA Rules, 2005’).

5. Pursuant to the aforesaid letter, the Departmental Enquiry Commissioner, Bihar, was appointed as Enquiry Officer to conduct the enquiry and the copy of the said resolution was communicated to the petitioner enclosing the memo of charges and the evidence as enumerated therein.

6. The petitioner has been supplied the copy of charge-sheet submitted by the Economic Offence Unit, as evidence, besides the Government instructions issued by the General Administrative Department, Bihar and declaration of assets dated 05.02.2013 submitted by the petitioner in the department and the letters of the Economic Offence Unit, including the FIR. After having completed the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted a detailed enquiry report holding all the charges proved against the petitioner. The copy of the enquiry report was served to the petitioner and second show-cause notice was asked and after receipt of the second show-cause reply the same was discussed at the Government level and it was found that the Enquiry Officer held the petitioner guilty after due examination of written defence statement in the light of the evidence adduced by the Presenting Officer and, as such, the charges stood proved against the petitioner, for which he was awarded punishment of stoppage of 100 per cent pension permanently vide notification contained in memo no. 1919 dated 03.09.2019, as contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition, which is impugned herein.

7. On being aggrieved by the order inflicting punishment of stoppage of 100 per cent pension, the petitioner preferred revision petition, which has been rejected vide order dated 06.02.2020 (