Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) IN the accompanied writ application, the petitioner, inter -alia, has prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 23.12.2011 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the order dated 10.07.2012 passed by the Appellate Authority pertaining to dismissal from services.
(2.) SANS detail facts as averred in the writ application in a nutshell is that the petitioner was appointed as police constable posted in JAP -9 on 19.02.2008 while the petitioner was posted at Sahebganj suffered from Brain Malaria and on this ground he was posted in the district of Ranchi for getting better treatment in RIMS, Ranchi. On 16.04.2010 the petitioner was posted in JAP -10 Mahila Battalion. The Medical Officer of the Mahila Battalion referred the petitioner to RINPAS, Ranchi for treatment of his mental problem on 30.09.2010. After his treatment, the petitioner was referred to RIMS, Ranchi and later on referred to AIIMS, New Delhi on 13.10.2010. After operation at AIIMS, New Delhi, the petitioner resumed his duty on 29.3.2011. On 30.3.2011 while the petitioner was on duty accidentally a shot was fired from the rifle which he was carrying but nobody was injured and the matter was reported to the higher authority by the father of the petitioner himself and incident was brought to the knowledge of the higher authority. On the basis of report an First Information Report was lodged as Sadar P.S. Case No. 87/11 dated 31.03.2011 under sections 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. On the said charges a departmental proceedings was also initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner replied to the charges stating therein that the charges levelled against him is false and everything happened by way of accident and not intentionally. Inquiry Officer submitted his report on 25.07.2011 and holding the petitioner guilty of the charges. The Commandant -cum -Departmental Authority JAP -10 on the basis of the report of the Inquiry Officer, passed an order of dismissal vide order dated 23.12.2011 vide Annexure -6 to the writ application. Being aggrieved by the order of Disciplinary Authority, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority affirmed the order of dismissal passed by the Disciplinary Authority vide Annexure -8 to the writ petition.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by the order of Disciplinary Authority dated 23.12.2011 as well as the order of the Appellate Authority dated 10.07.2012 left with no other efficacious alternative remedy the petitioner invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievance.;