KAMALATIWARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ULTIMATELY whatever punishment the petitioner received was scaled down as is recorded in the order dated 28 November, 1992 contained in memo no. 1630 which was communi - cated to the petitioner on 14 December, 1992. At the time of submissions on this appeal an issue was attempted to be raised that the petitioner had no knowledge of this order and the question of filing an appeal does not arise. This argument is unfortunate as it is the petitioners submission on an affidavit, sworn on 21. September, 1992, placing on record this very memo as annexure no. 22. That at every given time the petitioner was aware of whatever may have happened and of the number of departmental inquiries which had been conducted, the ultimate against him stood thus : (Local language)

(2.) NOT to be ignored is an aspect that the petitioner had filed four writ petitions. First was C.W.J.C. No. 2453 of 1982. The next was C.W.J.C. No. 4351 of 1982, then C.W.J.C. No. 3110 of 1984 and the last was C.W.J.C. No. 2890 of 1990. Two writ petitions i.e., C.W.J.C. No. 4351 of 1982 and C.W.J.C. No. 3110 of 1984 were withdrawn. The petitioner faces a set of departmental proceedings. Basically, the misdemeanour of the petitioner was that would not accept his postings and resisted them. This became an aspect of a charge against him which resulted in a punishment. When one set of proceeding saw his reinstatement the petitioner, thereafter, kept his residence at Arrah which was not his headquarters though he had been posted at Nawanagar.Then he remained absent from April 1982 to May, 1992 on the plea of being out on tour which fact was found to be false. This is noted in paragraph 6 of the judgment which is sought to be quashed.

(3.) THE Court is not inclined to interfere on this appeal.