IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HARISH KUMAR, J.
Shankar Kumar Jha @ Shankar Jha Son of Late Uday Nandan Jha - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police - Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17097 of 2019 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6524, 7335 of 2023
Decided on : 11-09-2025
JUDGMENT :
HARISH KUMAR, J.
1. All these three writ petitions filed by the petitioner are inextricably liked with each other, hence they are being heard together and disposed off by this common order.
2. The writ petition bearing CWJC No. 6524 of 2023 was filed seeking issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the concerned respondents to grant promotion to the petitioner in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (hereinafter referred to as, “DSP”) from the rank of Police Inspector on the ground of his exoneration in the Departmental Proceeding No. 33 of 2016, with all consequential benefits with effect from the date when it was found due.
3. During the pendency of the writ petition, vide Memo No. 112 dated 12.02.2024, issued under the signature of Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority-cum-Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur exonerating the petitioner in Disciplinary Proceeding No. 33 of 2016 has been reviewed, by exercising the power under Rule 853 A of the BIHAR POLICE MANUAL and further directed the Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur to re-conduct the departmental proceeding against the petitioner. The petitioner being aggrieved with the order, aforenoted, to the extent it affects the right and entitlement of the petitioner has questioned the same by filing an interlocutory application bearing I.A. No. 01 of 2024, which came to be allowed on 26.11.2024.
4. Whereas, the CWJC No. 17097 of 2019, came to be filed seeking quashing of the resolution dated 12.03.2019, issued by the Director General’s Board (in short, “DG Board”), whereby the recommendation made by the Police Headquarter, Bihar, Patna in Letter No. 4841/XP dated 30.06.2016 for promotion to the petitioner from the post of Police Inspector to the rank of DSP, which has been acted upon, has been recalled. Further the Memo No. 626 dated 14.10.2022, issued by the Police Headquarter under the signature of Inspector General of Police (Headquarter), Bihar, Patna whereby, the petitioner was placed under suspension retrospectively with effect from 28.07.2022, is put to challenge by filing CWJC No. 7335 of2023.
5. The relevant facts leading to institution of all these writ petitions, in brief, are that, while the petitioner was working as an Inspector and as per the gradation list of Inspector cadre, the promotion to the rank of DSP was due; the Zonal Board headed by Zonal Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Zone, scrutinized the service particulars of those Inspectors, whose promotion was under zone of consideration, including the petitioner. A meeting of the Board of Director General was convened for promotion from the post of Police Inspector to the rank of DSP on 27.06.2016. The petitioner was found fit for promotion and accordingly, a recommendation was sent to the Home (Police) Department, Bihar, Patna vide Letter No. 4841/XP dated 30.06.2016. In pursuant, thereto, a DPC was convened on 17.11.2016, and consequently, promotion was granted to the petitioner in the rank of DSP. A notification to this effect under Memo No. 9399 dated 30.11.2016 was issued under the signature of Deputy Secretary to the Government. Later on, the services to the post of DSP was also confirmed with effect from 30.11.2017.
6. Shortly after promotion to the post of DSP, on 04.05.2017, the concerned Superintendent of Police communicated and sent a memo of charge to the Enquiry Officer for conducting departmental proceeding and accordingly, the Enquiry Officer served the charged memo to the petitioner on 11.05.2017 vide Annexure-8/P-41.
7. The Enquiry Officer after conclusion of the proceeding, sent the file to the disciplinary authority vide Annexure-9 dated 12.07.2018. Since at the point of time, the petitioner was working as the DSP, so the file was sent to the Home Department. On receipt of the file, a query was made vide order as contained in Memo No. 7583 dated 29.08.2018, from the Director Gen
Anjan Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Shrisht Dhawan (SMT) Vs. M/s Shaw Brothers
Union of India & Ors. Vs. K V Jankiraman & Ors.
Coal India Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Saroj Kumar Mishra
Chairman- cum-Managing Director, Coal India Limited & Ors. Vs. Ananta Saha & Ors.
AI
Promotion cannot be denied if no charge memo is pending against an employee; actions taken on procedural flaws may be considered arbitrary and illegal.
Charge memo in disciplinary proceedings must be approved by the disciplinary authority; lack thereof renders entire proceedings vitiated ab initio, warranting quashing without remand in peculiar circ....
Departmental proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, and acquittal in criminal cases does not preclude disciplinary action but requires proper evidence examination.
Disciplinary proceedings against a public servant must cease if the charges are identical to those leading to an honourable acquittal in a criminal case, ensuring fairness in due process.
Termination of a government employee without evidence and proper authority violates Article 311 and principles of natural justice.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.