ANWAR ALI @ MD. ANWAR ALI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2010-1-137
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on January 13,2010

Anwar Ali @ Md. Anwar Ali Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

D.N. Patel, J. - (1.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner was initially, appointed as Class -IV employee on 23rd December, 1966, with the respondents and has worked sincerely, honestly and diligently to the satisfaction of the respondents for several decades and abruptly, without giving any notice and without giving any opportunity of being heard and without serving any charge -sheet, the allegations levelled against the petitioner were presumed to have been true and correct and the services of the petitioner have been brought to an end, by way of compulsory retirement by the Executive Engineer, Waterways Division, Barhi, District -Hazaribagh, vide order dated 30th March, 2006, Annexure -4 to the memo of petition and, therefore the present petition has been preferred. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner Had been working as Class -IV employee, thereafter, he has worked several decades with the respondents to the satisfaction and abruptly the Executive Engineer, Waterways Division, Barhi, District -Hazaribagh, has passed the order of punishment' of compulsory retirement, without giving any charge -sheet, without giving any show cause notice, without holding any enquiry and without giving any opportunity of being heard and therefore, the impugned order dated 30th March, 2006, which is at Annexure -4 and the consequential order of recovery of amount deserves to be quashed and set aside.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that the petitioner has tampered his own Service Book. The date of birth has been interpolated from 1937 to 1947. Thus, the present petitioner has changed the date of birth in his own Service Book, without any authority so that he can serve for one decade more. His correct date of birth is 16th March, 1937, whereas, the petitioner has interpolated his date of birth in his own Service Book as 16th (sic) was made without any authority of law, which tantamounts to a gross misconduct and thus, there is no substance in the whole writ petition and hence, the same deserves to be dismissed. Having heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that: (i) the present petitioner was working as Class -IV employee since 23rd December, 1966 to the satisfaction of the respondents, (ii) it appears that an order was passed by the Executive Engineer, waterways Division, Barhi, District -Hazaribagh on 30th March, 2006, whereby, it has been alleged that the petitioner has tampered his own Service Book and has changed the date of birth) as 16th March, 1947 instead of 16th March, 1937, and, therefore, he has been ordered to be retired compulsorily vide the impugned order which is at Annexure -4 to the memo of petition, (iii) it further appears that before passing the punishment order of premature retirement, no notice was ever given to the petitioner, no charge -sheet was ever served upon the petitioner, no inquiry has ever been conducted and no inquiry report has been given to the petitioner and, as such, in absence of all these bare minimum requirement, the order of punishment of premature retirement on the basis of certain allegations deserves to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) OFFICERS of the respondents -State ought to have kept in mind that whenever any employee's services are to be terminated or whenever any punishment is imposed with certain allegations upon any employee of the State, at least, show cause notice ought to have been given, so as to give an opportunity to the employee to represent his case before the high ranking officers of the State. This bare minimum requirement is known as principles of natural justice, which has been violated in the facts of the present case and, therefore, I hereby, quash and set aside the order passed by the Executive Engineer, Waterways Division, Barhi, District -Hazaribagh, dated 30th March, 2006, Annexure -4 to the memo of petition. The petition is allowed with a cost of Rs. 1,000/ - which will initially, be paid by the State to the petitioner and will be recovered, upon holding inquiry, from the erring officer(s). The petitioner will be paid all the consequential benefits like retirement benefits, Pension, Gratuity etc.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.