N.N.TIWARI, J. - (1.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the Office Order No. 1168/04 issued by Memo No. 2499 (4) dated 10.9.2004 (An -nexure -4) as also for quashing the Office Order No. 865/04 issued by Memo No. 1848, dated 22.7.2004 (Annexure -5) issued by the Superintendent of Police (T) Special Branch, Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the petitioner 'spay scale has been reduced to the scale of Rs. 3050.00 and a sum of Rs. 1,09,391 allegedly paid in excess has been sought to be recovered.
(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he has been proceeded against departmentally by serving charge -sheet containing the articles of changes wherein it has been alleged that the petitioner has got his pay enhanced illegally without the required departmental training. That Departmental Proceeding being No. 18/04 is still pending and in the mean while, the order of reduction of his pay as well as recovery of the excess amount has been issued. The grievance of the petitiorer is that even before conclusion of the proceeding the impugned orders have been arbitrarily and illegally passed prejudging the allegation against him contrary to the provision of law and without any basis.
(3.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents supporting the impugned orders and contending, inter alia, that the petitioner has submitted his explanation and the same has to be considered by the concerned respondent. It has been further submitted that the departmental enquiry has been initiated by way of disciplinary action and the same is still pending for final disposal. As per the Police Order No. 238 -93, the petitioner is not entitled to get the salary and increment of a trained police constable and thus the recovery process has been started. Subsequently, supplementary counter affidavit has been filed whereby it has been stated that the said departmental proceeding No. 18/04 has been disposed of by order dated 11.6.2005 and a copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure -E. By the said An -nexure -E the petitioner has been held guilty of getting the excess salary and in that view the earlier orders were passed during the pendency of the departmental proceeding i.e. the impugned Annexure -4 and 5 have been approved.;