ANANTA PROSAD SETT Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Rule was obtained by the petitioner for quashing certain disciplinary proceedings by the respondents against him briefly in the stated circumstances as follows :

(2.) AFTER the establishment of the office of Superintendent of Police (Cordoning) by the State Government, the petitioner was appointed sometime in 1965 Head Clerk in the Cordoning section by the same Superintendent of police. The petitioner was placed under suspension by an order made on or about 20. 1. 67 by D. I. G. of Police, c. I. D. and E. B. , on charges of misconduct for accepting illegal gratification and indulging in other corrupt practices. On or about 22nd January, 1967, the petitioner was charge-sheeted by the same authority with as many as six separate items of charges of accepting illegal gratification of various amounts on different dates and other misconduct with statement of allegations in support of those charges. The petitioner submitted his explanation pleading his innocence to all the material allegations. The petitioner also questioned the power and jurisdiction of the disciplinary authority to hold the proceeding and to impose penalty upon him. An inquiry into the charges was started by one D. Haldar, a superintendent of Police, who rejected the prayer of the petitioner for assistance of a lawyer. Another Enquiring Officer was appointed who recorded the evidence and submitted his report stating that the disciplinary authority had jurisdiction and on a finding that the charge nos. 3, 4, and 6 were established and although he thought dismissal was the proper punishment in this case he recommended for lesser punishment having regard to the age and efficiency of the petitioner.

(3.) THEREAFTER the matter was taken up by the D. I. G. , Enforcement Branch, respondent No. 2, who came to a finding that all the charges namely Charge nos. 2, 3, 4 and 6 were established and the other charges namely 1 and 5 were highly suspicious and after examining his character roll came to a provisional finding that the petitioner should be dismissed from his service. Accordingly, he served a second show cause notice upon the petitioner to submit an explanation against finding and provisional order of dismissal. That is how in short the petitioner felt aggrieved and obtained the present Rule.