TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. S.K. Ughal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradip Modi, learned Government Pleader No. 1 for the State of Jharkhand -respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner, in the instant case, has prayed for quashing the resolution dated 15.5.1999 by which the punishment of dismissal from service and recovery of Rs. 48,781.44 paise was inflicted upon the husband of the petitioner. The petitioner has also made a prayer for quashing the enquiry report as against the concerned employee by which the enquiry officer had found the charges levelled against the husband of the petitioner to be proved. Consequently the petitioner also makes a prayer for quashing the entire departmental proceedings. It is not necessary to go into the details of the facts save and except to take notice of the fact that the petitioners husband was proceeded against for the following charges : (a) Proceeding on unauthorised leave. (b) Making appointment of daily wagers without any authority. (c) Misappropriating a sum of Rs. 20,336.60 paise. (d) Dereliction of duty. (e) Gross negligence. (f) Giving wrong information to the Controlling Officer. (g) Frequently misappropriating a sum of Rs. 28,445.48 paise against 154.595 quintals of wheat.
(3.) THE enquiry officer found all the charges proved against the petitioners husband. The aforesaid enquiry report was submitted on 17.11.1994 by Annexure 5. Thereafter on 29.12.1994, the Additional Secretary of the Government issued a second show cause notice upon the petitioners husband asking him to show cause against the proposed punishment. It was intimated in the said show cause notice that the Government was considering the matter in relation to removing him from service. It appears that thereafter the petitioners husband filed CWJC No. 2350 of 1995 before the Patna High Court and by order dated 24.8.1995, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn vide Annexure 8. To that extent, therefore, the second show cause notice dated 29.12.1994 as contained in Annexure 7 was not interfered with by the High Court. ;