AWADESH KUMAR RAM Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.
LAWS(JHAR)-2015-11-93
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on November 27,2015

Awadesh Kumar Ram Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter-alia prayed for quashing the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority in Departmental Proceeding no.45/2004 as contained in D.O. Dated 31.12.2005 pertaining to dismissal from services and for quashing the order passed by the Appellate Authority dated 26.03.2008 confirming the order of disciplinary authority and for direction to the respondents to reinstate petitioner in services with all consequential benefits.
(2.) The factual matrix as disclosed in the writ application, in a nutshell is that the petitioner initially was appointed as Constable in the year 1989 and thereafter the petitioner continued to discharge his duties to the best of his ability and to the utmost satisfaction of his authorities. During his posting at Chaibasa the petitioner suffered from illness and was treated by the Doctor from 07.11.2002 till 16.02.2003, thereafter, after recovery from illness, he joined the duty on 17.02.2003. Again the petitioner underwent treatment of the doctor from 20.04.2003 to 22.06.2003 after recovery from the said illness, he joined his duty on 23.06.2003. In view of aforesaid absence, the departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner. The Inquiry Officer conducted ex-parte inquiry and submitted inquiry report holding the petitioner guilty of charges. The copy of the inquiry report was not supplied to the petitioner. The disciplinary authority (respondent no.5) without considering the inquiry report, awarded the punishment of dismissal from service vide order dated 31.12.2005. Being aggrieved by the order of dismissal preferred before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority rejected the appeal vide memo dated 26.03.2008.
(3.) Being aggrieved by the order of the disciplinary authority as well as appellate authority, the petitioner left with no other alternative, efficacious and speedy remedy, has approached this Court invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.