M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.

1. Indu Bhushan Dwivedi, the petitioner herein, aggrieved by the order of the Government dated 22.02.2006 dismissing him from service from the post of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chaibasa on the basis of the recommendations sent by the High Court through the letter dated 30.01.2006, has filed this writ petition praying to quash the same and to grant consequential benefits.

2. The short facts, relevant for the disposal of the writ petition, are as follows.

3. The petitioner was appointed as a Munsif in the year 1982. He was promoted in the year 1986 and posted as a Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani. In the year 1989, he was transferred to Chaibasa as Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate.

4. On 02.07.2003 a news was published in the daily newspaper "Dainik Jagran" alleging that the petitioner assaulted the accused, who was remanded before him in his residence and the constable escorting the said accused. On noticing this news, the petitioner sent a letter to the District Judge, Chaibasa on 03.07.2003, the copy of which was sent to the Registrar General requesting them to inquire into the matter as this news was false. However, on the basis of the report from the Registrar of the Civil Court, the High Court passed a suspension order on 05.07.2003, initiating the disciplinary proceedings and asking him not to leave the headquarters without obtaining prior permission of the Registrar General of the High Court.

5. Even before the service of the said suspension order, he obtained the permission on 04.07.2003 from the District Judge, Chaibasa to leave the headquarters as he became sick and was suffering from loose motions. On permission, he went to Ranchi for taking treatment. Having received the said order, he sent an application on 07.07.2003 requesting to grant him permission to remain away from the headquarters in the light of the advice of the doctor. However, the permission, sought for, was rejected by the High Court. Then on 19.07.2003, he addressed a letter to the District Judge, explaining his physical disability to report to the headquarters and indicating that the order rejecting the request for the permission to stay away from the Headquarters and the direction given to him that he should not leave the Headquarters inspite of his grave illness is merciless. After completion of the treatment, the petitioner came back to Headquarters at Chaibasa on 10.09.2003 and remained there continuously.

6. On 16.12.2003, three charges were framed against him. The first charge relates to his alleged assault, in an intoxicated condition, made on the accused, who was remanded before him as well as the constable, who produced before him in his residence.

The second charge relates to the violation of the direction by the High Court to the delinquent not to leave headquarters during suspension period without permission till 10.09.2003.

The third charge relates to the use of the derogatory words mentioned in his reply dated 09.07.2003 stating that the direction given for reporting to the headquarters is merciless.

7. The petitioner filed preliminary explanation of all these charges on 30.01.2004. Thereafter, the inquiry officer was appointed on 28.05.2004. During the inquiry, the District Judge of Chaibasa was also examined as P.W.4. On behalf of the delinquent, D.W.1 the doctor and D.W.2 were examined to support his plea that he was under treatment during the relevant period at Ranchi. Ultimately, on 04.06.2005, the inquiry officer submitted his inquiry report holding the petitioner not guilty of the charge No. 1 relating to the assault on the constable and the accused and holding guilty of charge No. 2 and 3 relating to the violation of the orders as well as using derogatory words in the letter sent to the District Court.

8. On accepting the said report, the High Court issued a second show cause notice on 30.06.2005, asking him as to why the punishment of dismissal should not be imposed against him.