SHAFI AHMAD Vs. ADMINISTRATOR BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for quashing the, order dated 31.7.2001 (Annexure -6) whereby the petitioner has been visited with the penalty of compulsory retirement.

(2.) SHORT facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner at the relevant time was working as Faras. By order dated 23.2.2001 (Annexure -1) he was put under suspension in contemplation of a departmental proceeding. Later on by memo dated 5.8.01 charges were levelled against the petitioner and he was asked to submit his reply. Petitioner filed his reply denying all the charges. The inquiry officer submitted its report holding the petitioner guilty of the charges. On receipt of the inquiry report the disciplinary authority by communication dated 21.7.2001 gave notice to the petitioner against the proposed punishment of compulsory retirement and asked him to show cause within fifteen days. Petitioner filed his show cause and the disciplinary authority by the impugned order dated 31.7.2001 inflicted the punishment of compulsory retirement.

(3.) HAVING appreciated the rival submission, I do not find any substance in the submission of Shri Shukla. It is well settled that existence of an alternative remedy does not bar the jurisdiction of this court and it is often said, it is a rule of discretion and not of jurisdiction. Here in the present case petitioner had filed the writ application as back as on 10.9.2001 and the respondents have filed the counter affidavit on merits also. In my opinion at such a distance of time, in the face of the respondents filing counter affidavit and indicating their stand on the merits of the case, relegating of the petitioner to the remedy of appeal shall be inequitable and on this ground I overrule the preliminary objection.