M.N. Roy, J. -
(1.)In this Rule, the Petitioner has impeached the issue of a charge -sheet dated June 20, 1972, the final order passed thereon and the order dated September 14, 1973, made in an appeal from the said order.
(2.)The Petitioner was first appointed as a constable in the year 1950 and in or about 1963 he was promoted to the post of Assistant, Sub -Inspector of Police, after passing the departmental examination and was put in the scale of Rs. 125 -200 plus dearness allowance with yearly increment of Rs. 5 He has stated to have served in the said post upto June 1971 and from July 1971 till the date of the initiation of the proceeding as mentioned hereinafter he was employed as Sub -Inspector of Police, Gaighata P.S. 24 -Parganas, under the Superintendent of Police, district 24 -Parganas He has stated that during the tenure of the service as aforesaid he has discharged his duties and functions honestly, sincerely and to the entire satisfaction of his superiors apart from the fact that at all material times he had a clear, satisfactory and unblemished service record The latter portion of the statements, as aforesaid, have of course been denied by the answering Respondents in their affidavit -in opposition dated August 22, 1974, (hereinafter referred to as the said affidavit) The Petitioner has also claimed to have received as many as 23 money rewards and 2 other rewards The number of money rewards, as mentioned hereinbefore, have of course been stated by the said Respondents in their said affidavit to be 19 only On or about June 20, 1972, a charge -sheet against the Petitioner for misconduct was issued by the Superintendent of Police (Respondent No. 4) and the terms of the said charge -sheet were as under:
1. In the year 1965 while you were functioning as Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police at Baranagar Police Station you had been found to have disproportionate assets to the extent of Rs. 3,500 (Rupees Three Thousand Five Hundred only) and this you failed to account for satisfactorily.
2. In the year 1967 while you were functioning as Asstt. Sub -Inspector of Police at Baranagar Police Station you purchased landed properties worth Rs. 1,000 (Rupees One Thousand only) at village Chakda without taking any permission from your appointing authority and thereby you violated Rule 15(2)(a) of West Bengal Government Servants' Conduct Rules.
(3.)The said charge -sheet is at annex A to the petition and the statement of allegations on which the charges were based are:
(1) During the year 1965, the total emoluments drawn by the officiating Sub -Inspector Bipad Bhanjan Sarkar was Rs. 200 per month approximately He was then attached to Baranagar Police Station as Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police He had large family consisting of 7 children, yet he deposited Rs. 2,100 in the postal account standing in the name of his wife His declaration of assets as stood on January 1, 1965, showed cash of Rs. 1,500 and in subsequent year, he himself showed it as Rs. 5,000 He has no other visible source of income and such glaring increase in assets with such small pay in the large family remains unexplained.
(2) This officer while functioning as Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police at Baranagar in the year 1967 purchased landed properties worth Rs. 1,000 at village Chakda without taking any permission from his appointing authority and thus he violated the provisions as mentioned in Rule 15(2)(a) of the West Bengal Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1959 This charge could be disproved if the officer did take permission for the purchase of the landed properties in the year 1967.