ALTAMAS KABIR, J. - (1.) THIS is one of those cases referred by the learned Single Judge to the Division Bench for hearing and disposal, since the question regarding the invocation of Rule 74(b)(ii) of the Jharkhand Service Code, is involved.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Munsif in the Bihar Judicial Service in the year 1975 and joined at Siwan on 7th June, 1975. Thereafter, the petitioner was posted as Judicial Magistrate at Patna and was also promoted to the post of Sub -Judge at Patna. From Patna, the petitioner was posted as Sub -Judge at Naugachia from where he was transferred to Nawada and posted as the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate -cum -Special Judge -1 and was posted with the power of Assistant Sessions Judge. While at Nawada, the petitioner was suspended and a departmental proceeding was initiated against him. Having been found guilty in the said proceeding, the petitioner was reverted to the post of Munsif and posted at Koderma in the judgeship of Hazaribagh. From Koderma, he was sent to Raj Mahal in the judgeship of Sahebganj in the same capacity, where he was served with an order dated 17th July, 2001 passed by the Deputy Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, informing him that he had been compulsorily retired from service. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition.
(3.) APPEARING in support of the writ petition, Mr. Rajeev Lochan Sharma contended that since the petitioner had once been punished in the disciplinary proceedings and had been reverted to the post of Munsif, the decision to retire the petitioner compulsorily amounted to double jeopardy which could not be sustained. Apart from the above, Mr. Sharma also submitted that after the petitioner had been promoted to the post of Sub -Judge -cum -Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, the earlier defaults, if any, of the petitioner stood wiped out and the case of the petitioner was required to be considered on the basis of his performance after he was promoted Mr. Sharma submitted that after 1990, there was no allegation against the petitioner and he had been discharging his duties as a judicial officer with distinction and without any blemish. Mr. Sharma urged that the order impugned in the writ petition was not in keeping with the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of All India Judges ' Association V/s. Union of India, - - - - .;