RAM NARESH RAI Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts of the instant matter is that the petitioner was serving as a Constable Driver in the Meghalaya Police and that vide order dated 31.05.2017 passed by the respondents in a departmental proceeding, he was inflicted with a major penalty and dismissed from service. The main ground for challenge as alleged is the non-supply of the enquiry report on which the dismissal order has been based upon which the petitioner contends has vitiated the entire enquiry. Being aggrieved thereby, the writ petitioner is before this Court.

(2.) Mr. R. Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petitioner has taken part in the proceedings and at the culmination of the same, he was never provided a copy of the enquiry report but was only served with a dismissal order, which is impugned herein. He further submits that the factum of the non-supply of the enquiry report has been corroborated by the respondents in their affidavit who have stated that the writ petitioner never requested for the same in writing. It has been submitted that the dismissal proceedings being vitiated for non-adherence to the set procedure, the dismissal order is bad in law and should be set aside and quashed.

(3.) Mr. S. Sengupta, learned Addl. Sr. GA for the State respondents submits that the writ petitioner had taken part in every stage of the departmental proceedings and had appended his signature on the materials adduced therein and also examined and cross-examined witnesses. He further submits that the petitioner never requested for the enquiry report and the charges against writ petitioner are very grave which resulted in the penalty of dismissal from service. He further submits that moreover, the writ petitioner never preferred an appeal against the dismissal order before the appellate authority, which is provided as per law. As such, he submits the petitioner not having availed of alternative remedy, the instant writ petition deserves no consideration.