Patna High Court CWJC No.21088 of 2012 (4) dt.19-12-2012

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21088 of 2012

======================================================

Mahendra Pratap Singh S/O Late Brajendra Pratap Singh Resident Of

Village - Baruari, P.S- Supaul, District - Supaul, State - Bihar

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna

3. Deputy Inspector General Of Police, Purnea

4. Superintendent Of Police, Araria

5. Inquiry Officer-Cum-Deputy Superintendent Of Police Head Quarter,

Araria

.... .... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajnikant Jha, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. A. Kumar, A.C. to A.G.

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN

ORAL ORDER

4.

19.12.2012

Heard the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for

quashing Araria District Order No. 693 of 2011 dated

7.08.2011 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Araria

by which the petitioner has been inflicted with punishment

of withholding six months increments equivalent to one

black mark, as well as Purnea Range Order No. 249 of

2011 rejecting the petitioner’s appeal, as well as the

Enquiry Report dated 20.01.2011.

3. The short facts of the case are that a

departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner in

terms of charge sheet issued by the Superintendent of

Police, Araria alleging therein that the petitioner had failed

Patna High Court CWJC No.21088 of 2012 (4) dt.19-12-2012

2

to comply with the letter of D.I.G. Range, Bettiah in Memo

No. 285 dated 10.04.2008 as well as the reminder letter in

Memo No. 530 dated 5.07.2008 requiring the petitioner to

send the service book of Police Sub-Inspector, Rabindra

Nath Thakur. Owing to non-receipt of the said service book

could not be punished and he superannuated on

31.09.2009 thereby getting the benefit of gratuity and

pension.

4. The solitary plea of the petitioner is that the

letter of D.I.G. Range, Bettiah dated 10.08.2008 as well as

the reminder letter dated 5.07.2008 were never brought to

his knowledge, non-compliance of which formed the sum

and substance of the charge sheet against the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the Enquiry Report and order of punishment suffer from

perversity and are liable to be quashed. It is submitted

that the consistent stand of the petitioner has been that

the said two letters were addressed to the Superintendent

of Police, Araria but were never brought to his knowledge.

It was only after the letter dated 10.04.2008 was issued

that the petitioner had joined as reserve S.I., Araria on

16.04.2008 and remained there only up to 12.05.2008

being prior to the issuance of the reminder letter dated

5.07.2008. Even though the petitioner’s stand has been

taken note of by the Enquiry Officer, the same has been

Patna High Court CWJC No.21088 of 2012 (4) dt.19-12-2012

3

ignored and nothing to the contrary has come before him.

He invites attention to the Enquiry Report to show that the

said letter dated 10.04.2008 was not even made an exhibit

and even the witness Shiv Sagar Prasad stated that he had

not seen the relevant letter. Despite the unopposed

categorical stand of the petitioner that the relevant letters

dated 10.04.2008 and 5.07.2008 were never brought to his

knowledge, the Enquiry Officer opined that the charge

against the petitioner stood proved on the ground that

another incumbent Sergeant Major Sri Anuranjan Kumar

has also been found guilty in respect of the same charge. It

is submitted that the findings of the Enquiry Officer are

thus based on mere suspicion which, as is well settled,

can never take the place of