- (1.) THE writ petitioner, an Additional Chief mining Engineer, Project Division, Bharat Coking Coal Limited. Kayla bhawan, Dhanbad, Bihar, has filled the present writ petition for praying, inter alia, :- a) A Writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to Cancel, rescind, withdraw and/or set aside the impugned order of suspension being No. BCCL/x/c/47 (l)/92/675 dated 29. 9. 92 issued by the respondent No. 4 herein, being Annexure - D' herein, and further forbearing the respondents from giving any effect or further effect to and/or from taking any steps or further steps pursuant to the aloresaid order of suspension; b) A Writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to quash the disciplinery proceeding initiated against the petitioner including the chargesheet dated 10th October, 1992 being No. BCCL/ee/x/c/47 (l)/92/700 issued by the respondent no. 4 herein, being Annexure 'e' herein, and further forbearing the respondent from taking any steps or further steps pursuant to the aforesaid chargesheet against the [petitioner; c) A Writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to cancel, rescind, withdraw, quash and/or set aside the entire disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner including the chargesheet dated 16. 1. 93 being no. BCCL/ee/k/ c/4/93/40 issued by the respondent No. 4 herein, being Annexure - 'h' herein, and further forbearing the respondents from taking any steps or further steps pursuant to and/or acting or further acting in furtherence of the aforesaid chargesheet in any manner whatsoever. d) A Writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to withhold the promotion of the petitioner because of the pendency of the criminal investigation and / or criminal case. e) A writ of and/or in the nature; of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from proceeding any further and/or taking any further steps pursuant to the initiation of the disciplinary proceedings and the chargesheets dated 10. 10. 92 and 16. 1. 93 respect - lively both issued by the respondent No. 4 being Annexures E' and h' respectively, and to allow the petitioner to resume his duties without any disturbance/interference from the end of the respondents authorities in any manner whatsoever. f) A writ of and/of in the nature of certiorari directing the respondents to transmit the entire records of the case before this Hon'ble court and to certify the same so that after perusing the same conscionable justice may be administered by quashing the disciplinary proceedings including the chargesheets, as aforesaid: g) Rule Nisi in terms of prayers (a) to (f) as above : h) Grant an ad- interim order of injunction restraining the respondents from giving effect of further effect and/or taking any steps or further steps and/or from acting in furtherence of the impugned order of suspension dated 29. 9. 92 issued by the respondent No. 4 being annexure 'd' and to allow the petitioner to resume his, duties and carry on his functions as Area General Manager without any disturbance/interference in any manner whatsoever till the disposal of the Rule : i) Grant an ad-interim order restraining the ressondents from taking any steps/further steps pursuant to the disciplinary proceedings including the chargesheets dated 10. 10. 92 and 16. 1. 1993 issued by the respondent No. 4 being Annexures 'e' and 'h' respectively against the petitioner and to allow the petitioner to carry on his duties an general manager without any disturance / interference till the disposal of the Rule : j) Grant an ad-interim order of injunction in terms of prayers (g) and (h) as above : k) To make the Rule absolute and to pass such other order or orders as to your Lordships may fit and proper.
(2.) IT is stated in details that for various satisfactory services and considering the past record the petitioner was granted, promotions at a comparatively quicker period and ultimately he was promoted to the rank of e-7 as the Additional Chief Mining Engineer and posted as the Area general Manager in March 1988. It is placed on record that for the purpose of appropriate and efficient administrative and statutory functioning and control of Collieries, the company has been composed of number of Areas and each area counsists of a number collieries. The petitioner was working as the General manager of one of the such areas, namely, Kusunda Area consisting of 8 (eight) collieries being East Busseriya, Gonudih, Khas kusunda, K. O. C. P. and Dhansar, Kusunda Industry and Busseriya colleries. There is a chart of the position of the executive as regards the administrative Control. It is contended that although the General Manager is having the vicarious responsibility, yet the direct responsibility are with the agent and/the manager. The day to day functions of Collieries are as per the order of the Agent and the manager. The Coal production, despatch of coal, the management of col stock are under the direct supervision and control of the Agent and the manager. The Agent and the manager are required to submit the reports of coal production, coal despatch, book stock of coal and physical stock of coal in prescribed forms of the company to the General Manager.
(3.) THE petitioner was however transferred to Head Quarter, Koyla bhawan, and he stood released with effect from 29. 9. 1992 from Kusunda area and he was directed to report for duty to Director (Tech) P and P Koyla bhawan. He was however, arrested by the C. B. I. Officials on 29th September, 1992 on the basis of an F. I. R. lodged by the Inspector of Police central Bureau of Investigation dated 28. 9. 92 bringing forth some charges related to Personal Assistant of the petitioner for an attempt to bribe the officials of the investigation team , as regards the verification of the Stock of Coal. The petitioner was however released on bail on the self-same date. On October 19. 1992. the petitioner received an order dated 29. 9 1992 issued by the respondent No. 4, The Chairman/managing Director Bharat coking Coal Limited, that a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner is contemplated and the petitioner was placed under suspension with immediate effect, i. e. , 29. 9. 1992. On 15th October, the petitioner was served with a chargesheet dated 10. 10. 1992 issued by the said respondent no. 4, where from it would transpire that the petitioner has been charged with having committed the following acts of misconduct : "1. Failed to maintain devotion to duly. 2. Acted in a manner prejuduicial to interest or image of the company. 3. Neglect of work of negligence in the performance of duty. ';