SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Pat) 706

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN, J.
Subodh Kumar Yadav, S/o. Late Laxmi Narayan Yadav - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department and Ors. – Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4580 of 2020
Decided On : 29-05-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh
For the Respondents: Mr. Subash Chandra Mishra.

Procedural impropriety in disciplinary proceedings invalidates dismissal; adherence to rules is essential for fairness.

Headnote:(A) Bihar CCA Rules, 2005 - Procedural impropriety in departmental proceedings - Dismissal of Assistant Teacher quashed due to violation of rules regarding charge memo and inquiry process - The inquiry was conducted without providing necessary documents and witnesses to the petitioner, violating principles of natural justice. (Paras 57, 58)

(B) Dismissal - The dismissal order was based on unproven charges and procedural lapses, leading to the conclusion that the disciplinary authority acted beyond its jurisdiction. (Paras 58, 59)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, was dismissed based on charges framed without proper inquiry and without providing necessary documents. The dismissal was challenged through various appeals and writ applications.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the dismissal order and subsequent appellate and revisional orders were issued in violation of procedural rules and principles of natural justice.

Issues: The main issues were whether the dismissal was justified based on the inquiry conducted and whether the petitioner was provided with necessary documents and witnesses.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the dismissal was invalid due to procedural impropriety, emphasizing the need for adherence to rules in disciplinary proceedings.

Result: The dismissal order and related orders were quashed, and the petitioner was entitled to all consequential benefits.

JUDGMENT :

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.)

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for the following reliefs:-

    (i) To quash the order contained in memo no- 748 dated 02.03.19 issued by the District Education Officer Purnea whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been dismissed from the posts of Assistant Teacher, Middle School mulabbas-Block Purnea East, District- Purnea. A copy of order memo no.748 dated 02.03.19 (Annexure- 1 to writ application).

    (ii) To quash the order contained in the Appellate order contained in memo no- 205 dated 17.05.2019 issued by Regional Deputy Director of Education, Purnea Division Purnea whereby and whereunder the appeal prefer by the petitioner against the order dated 02.03.2019 (Ann- 1) has been rejected. A copy of memo no- 205 dated 17.05.2019 (Annexure-2 of the writ application.)

    (iii) To direct the respondents to pay arrears of salary to the petitioner from March 2018 to July 2018 and from March 2019 till date with statutory interests.

    (iv) To direct the respondents not to disturb the petitioner from discharging his duties on the post of Assistant Teacher in Middle School, Gulabbag, Block-Purnea East, Purnea and pay the regular salary on month to month basis.

    (v) Thereafter, further reliefs were added by way of I.A. No.1 of 2021, to quash the order contained in memo no.664 dated 29.07.2020, Annexure-32 of the writ application, issued by the Director, Primary Education (Respondent No.3) whereby and whereunder Revision preferred by the petitioner against order dated 02.03.2019 (Annexure-1 of the writ application) and order dated 17.05.2019 (Annexure-2 of the writ application) has been rejected.

3. The short fact of the case is that, in 1988, petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher and was posted in Primary School Patila Bhasa, Block Pothiya, District-Kishanganj. In 1989, the petitioner was transferred from the above said school to Middle School Maharajpur, Purnea East, District-Purnea, where he submitted his joining which was duly accepted by the concern Headmaster and started discharging his duties to the satisfaction of authorities concern. Thereafter, in the year 1990, the petitioner was granted promotion in B.Sc. trained scale.

4. After transfer and posting in different schools, in the year 2007, the petitioner was transferred in Middle School Gulabbag, Block- Purnea East, Purnea, where he submitted his joining as Acting Headmaster and started discharging his duties to the satisfaction of authorities concerned.

5. While the petitioner was discharging his duties on the post of acting Headmaster, the District Programme Officer, (Estt.) Purnea vide memo no- 2815 dated 28.09.2013 issued memo of charge against the petitioner (Annexure- 3 to the writ application).

6. From perusal of the memo dated 28.09.2013 (Annexure-3), it appears that altogether 6 charges were framed against the petitioner. One Amrendra Gaur, posted as Programme Officer SSA, Purnea was appointed as conducting Officer and Block Education Officer, Sadar Headquarter was appointed as Presenting Officer.

7. No preliminary enquiry was conducted by the disciplinary authority. Before issuance of memo of charge, no decision with respect to initiation of departmental proceeding against the petitioner was taken by the Government or by the Appointing Authority or any authority to which the Appointing Authority is subordinate or any other authority empowered by special order of the Government. Along with memo of charge, list of witnesses, as per rules 17 (3) (ii) (b) of Bihar CCA Rule 2005 was not provided to the petitioner.

8. Vide letter no- 126 dated 14.11.2013, the Conducting Officer directed the petitioner to submit his explanation within a period of one week (Annexure- 4 to the writ application).

9. On 04.10.2013, the petitioner submitted an application before the District Education Officer, Purnea against the memo of charge and has prayed for stay of the said

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top