ABDUL KHALIQUE HUSSAIN SON OF LATE AABID HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF DHANGAR TOLI, WARD NO.2, CHATRA, P.O. AND P.S. CHATRA, DISTRICT CHATRA; AT PRESENT POSTED AS REVENUE KARMCHARI, AT AND P.O. MAUREHANT, P.S. ITKHORI, DISTRICT CHATRA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for quashing the office order as contained in memo dated 07.07.2012, whereby punishment of (i)withholding of two increments with cumulative effect and (ii)only payment of subsistence allowance will be made to the petitioner during suspension, as contained in Annexure 7 to the writ application, has been imposed upon the petitioner and further direction upon the respondents to make payment of full salary in favour of the petitioner for the suspension period.

(2.) Sans details, the facts as disclosed in the writ petition, is that initially the petitioner was appointed as Moharrir in Chakbandi Office at Deo Block, Aurangabad. While continuing as Halka Karamchari, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 21.09.2010 on the basis of report submitted by the Additional Collector, Chatra on the allegation of manipulation of records relating to Ward No. 4 (old) and New Ward No. 18 concerning Khewat No. 1 of Municipal Holding No. 38/A of Register -II. Thereafter, charges were framed against the petitioner in Form-Ka, as evident from Annexure 2 to the writ application. It has been contended in the writ application that the report prepared by the Circle Officer, Chatra, which was forwarded to Deputy Commissioner, Chatra vide letter dated 25.05.2010, reveals that no manipulation was made by the petitioner in Register II, as evident from Annexure 3 to the writ application. It has further been contended that the Executive Magistrate-cum-Presentation Officer, Chatra has also written letter vide letter dated 25.05.2011 to Land Reforms Deputy Collector-cum-Conducting Officer that no evidence whatsoever has been found against the petitioner for the alleged manipulation in Register-II, as evident from Annexure 4 to the writ application. It is specific plea made by the petitioner, that after conclusion of the enquiry, the enquiry report was submitted to the concerned authority which was never supplied to the petitioner. However, the petitioner obtained the same under Right to Information Act, 2005 vide memo dated 30.07.2012. It has further been contended that when no action was taken by the respondents for revocation of suspension after submission of enquiry report, the petitioner being aggrieved with the order of suspension moved this Court by filing W.P. (S) No. 1974 of 2012, which was disposed of vide order dated 16.04.2012 directing respondent No. 2-the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra to take decision upon the enquiry report within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra issued the order dated 07.07.2012, by which, impugned punishment has been imposed upon the petitioner.

(3.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order at Annexure 7, the petitioner left with no alternative, efficacious and speedy remedy has approached this Court for redressal of his grievances invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.