- (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner, in this writ application, has prayed for quashing the order dated-29.04.2003 (Annexure-6), passed by the Superintendent of Police, West Singhbhum, (Respondent No. 4), whereby the punishment of dismissal from service was awarded to the petitioner. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated-04.02.2004 (Annexure-8), passed by the Appellate Authority, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order of his dismissal, was dismissed.
(3.) The main grounds on which the petitioner has challenged the impugned orders are as follows: (i) The departmental proceeding was conducted against the petitioner in a most illegal and arbitrary manner without affording opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses and even the material witnesses were not examined. (ii) The findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer are against the weight of evidence on record and perverse and based on conjectures and surmises and without application of mind. Even otherwise, the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer regarding the guilt of the petitioner is vague and ambiguous, since no definite finding that the charge has been proved against the petitioner, has been recorded. (iii) The Disciplinary Authority has committed a grave error in failing to consider the specific defence of the petitioner that no opportunity was given to him to cross-examine the witnesses and that material witnesses even though named in the prosecution's case, were not examined. (iv) The punishment of dismissal from service is unjustified, excessive and highly disproportionate to the gravity of the charges levelled against the petitioner. (v) The Disciplinary Authority as also the Appellate Authority have passed the impugned orders without application of mind.;