P.P. Bhatt, J. - (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
(2.) The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction to quash the order of dismissal of the petitioner dated 27.5.2000 contained in Memo No. 167 passed by the Dy. Commissioner, Pakur (Respondent No. 2) on the basis of report of the S.D.O., Pakuria. It has also been prayed for a direction upon the respondents to pay full salary form the year 1994 till date and other consequential benefits.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a short question of law is involved in this matter as to whether the departmental enquiry proceeding can stand on the basis of same charges where the criminal court has acquitted the delinquent for the same charges. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred Annexure-1 i.e. order of dismissal dated 27.5.2000 (Annexure-1) with a view to show the charges levelled against the petitioner in a departmental inquiry. Likewise, the learned counsel for the petitioner also referred Annexure-4, which is a criminal complaint, filed against the petitioner to indicate the charges levelled therein. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also invited attention to this Court that the petitioner has been acquitted by order dated 29.8.1996 (Annexure-5) in a criminal case being G.R. No. 89 of 1994. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also invited attention of this Court that being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order of acquittal passed by the criminal court, the then State of Bihar preferred an appeal being a Govt. Appeal No. 01/97 before the High Court, Ranchi Bench and the said appeal was dismissed by the High Court vide order dated 9.2.1998(Annexure-6). However, the disciplinary authority has not considered the factum of acquittal by the criminal court having charges similar to departmental proceeding as also dismissal of appeal preferred by the State against acquittal by the High Court, meaning thereby acquittal is confirm by the High Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Para- 5 of Annexure-9 i.e. written explanation and invited attention of this Court and submitted by the petitioner in response to show cause notice in the departmental proceeding with a view to show that fact of acquittal in a criminal case having similar charges and dismissed of appeal preferred by the State was very much brought to the notice of the disciplinary authority. It is submitted that there is no whisper about the said fact in the order of dismissal of the petitioner passed by the disciplinary authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order passed by the disciplinary authority is in clear contravention of principle of natural justice and, therefore, on this count, the order of dismissal of the petitioner passed by the disciplinary authority is required to be set aside. In support of his submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred and relied upon the judgment reported in 2009(2) JCR 269 ( Rafique Mian v. Central Coalfields Ltd. and Ors.) .;