KRISHNA BEHARI PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard counsel for the Petitioner and the counsel for the State as also the Accountant General in respect of the following relief:

(2.) From the records, particularly the enquiry report it appears that Mr. C.K. Anil, the then Enquiry Officer had held the Petitioner guilty only because the Petitioner did not choose to appear in course of departmental proceeding despite several notices as also newspaper communication for his participating in the departmental proceeding.

(3.) By-now it is well settled that even if a delinquent would not appear and the departmental proceeding would be conducted ex parte, the onus to prove the charge will lie on the authority who bring such charge. Admittedly this requirement was never fulfilled as is apparent at least from reading of the enquiry report wherein only explanation of the Petitioner has been dealt by the Enquiry Officer.