IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that dismissal for negligence was shockingly disproportionate to the charges, emphasizing the need for fair assessment in disciplinary proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Shankar, J.

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order as contained in memo No. 1486 dated 15.03.2019 (Annexure-13 to the present writ petition) passed by the respondent No.1 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been rejected and the order as contained in memo No. 2347 dated 15.05.2017 passed by the disciplinary authority (i.e. the respondent No.2) dismissing the petitioner from service has been affirmed. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order as contained in memo No. 2347 dated 15.05.2017 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) passed by the disciplinary authority (i.e. the respondent No.2) whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service. The petitioner has also prayed for directing the respondent authorities to reinstate her in service with effect from the date of her dismissal with all consequential benefits.

2. The factual background of the case emanating from the writ petition is that while the petitioner was on deputation as Nurse at Women Probation Home, Namkum, Ranchi, two residents of the said probation home, namely, Punam Kumari and Priya Kumari escaped in the night of 06.08.2016, however, the said incident came to light in the morning of 07.08.2016. Thereafter, an enquiry was conducted by the Assistant Inspector General, Jail, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, who submitted the enquiry report vide letter No. 2669 dated 25.8.2016.

3. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the respondent No.2 vide letter No. 3243 dated 14.10.2016 directing her to submit her explanation within five days. The petitioner submitted reply on 19.10.2016 (received in the office of the respondent No.2 on 21.10.2016), whereafter she was put under suspension in contemplation of departmental proceeding vide order as contained in memo No. 3770 dated 28.11.2016 issued by the respondent No.2 and her headquarter was fixed at the office of the respondent No.3. On the same day, a memo of charge in ‘’Prapatra-KA’’ containing five charges was served to the petitioner. Thereafter, vide office order as contained in memo No. 258 dated 30.11.2016 issued by the respondent No.4, the petitioner was relieved to join in the office of the respondent No.3 during suspension period in order to initiate departmental proceeding against her in which the respondent No.3 was appointed as enquiry-cum-conducting officer and the respondent No.4 as presenting officer. The petitioner gave her joining on 30.11.2016 itself.

4. The respondent No.3 submitted the enquiry report to the respondent No.2 vide letter No. 1212 dated 02.03.2017 wherein the petitioner was held guilty of the said incident. Subsequently, a second show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the respondent No.3 vide letter as contained in memo No. 1397 dated 11.3.2017 in the light of direction given by the respondent No.2 vide letter No. 980 dated 10.3.2017 whereby she was directed to submit her explanation within 15 days through proper channel. The petitioner submitted her reply to the second show cause notice on 23.3.2017 before the respondent No.3-the conducting officer, who submitted the report on 3.4.2017 mentioning that the charges levelled against the petitioner were found to be true and she was held guilty of the same.

5. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority dismissed the petitioner from service vide the order as contained in memo No. 2347 dated 15.5.2017. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Jail and Disaster Management (Home), Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi and during pendency of the said appeal, she was asked to vacate the quarter immediately vide letter No. 353 dated 27.6.2018 issued under the signature of the respondent No.4. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 4033 of 2018 before this Court which was disposed of vide order dated 17.12.2018 directing the appellate authority i.e. the respondent No.1