SURESH NANDAN SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State and upon perusal of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of. the respondents, this Court finds that the present writ application can be disposed off at the stage of admission itself.

(2.) THIS Court does not consider it necessary or relevant to recite in this judgment the facts of the case except to the extent necessary for appreciation of the limited controversy and disposal thereof.

(3.) THE counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents does not dispute this factual position. On 21.11.92 the memo of charges were served upon the petitioner for certain alleged acts done by him at Bargania. The memo of charges was for the period 1980 to 1988. The petitioner submitted his reply to the memo of charge on 3.12.92. It was specifically contended therein that he had handed over charge at Bargania on 6.7.81 and that in the nature of generalised charges the memo being not accompanied by the documents upon which the memo of charges were based he was prejudiced in submitting his reply. He, however, did submit his explanation with the handicap. It is the stand of the petitioner that thereafter no proceedings were held, no witnesses were examined, no document exhibited, no opportunity to meet the allegation against him was provided when the impugned order dated 15.9.1998 came to be passed imposing the punishment of censure in his annual confidential remarks for the period 1981 -84, stoppage of three increments without cumulative effect and denial of promotion for five years. The petitioner is said to have superannuated in the year 2002.