Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) IN the aforesaid writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for setting aside/quashing the order as contained in Memo No. 09/D/06 -01 -34/2012 dated 13.01.2014 whereby the revision petition preferred by the petitioner on 21.11.2012 has been dismissed and for quashing of the order as contained in Memo No. 2825 dated 20.05.2011 passed by the respondent No. 4 as well as the appellate order dated 08.10.2012 passed by the respondent No. 3 and further for direction to the respondents to make payment of arrears of salary and for all consequential benefits.
(2.) THE factual matrix as delineated in the writ application in a nutshell is that the petitioner while serving as constable was served with a memo of charge vide Memo No. 394 dated 21.12.2009 containing the charges of subjecting his legally married wife to cruelty and harassment for bringing more dowry from her parents and also for solemnizing his second marriage with another girl as per annexure -1 to the writ application. In pursuance to the said charge a departmental enquiry was held and the charges were found to be true against the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his explanation vide annexure -2 to the writ application and being not satisfied with the explanation of the petitioner, the petitioner was directed to file his further explanation before the authority explaining his defence and the copy of the second explanation has been annexed as Annexure -3 to the writ petition. The conducting officer of the departmental proceeding submitted his opinion on 30.04.2010 stating inter alia therein that all charges have been proved against the petitioner vide Annexure -4 to the writ petition and on the basis of the opinion of the conducting officer, the S.P., Bokaro (respondent No. 4) came to the conclusion as contained in memo No. 3045 dated 19.05.2010 that the petitioner has been found guilty of the charges levelled against him and on the proposed punishment of dismissal from services, the petitioner was asked to file his explanation as per annexure -5 to the writ application. The petitioner submitted his explanation stating inter alia that the charges are baseless and without any cogent legal evidence. Moreover, the Complaint Case No. 2282 of 2009 lodged under Section 498A IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been falsely instituted against him, therefore, the decision of the departmental proceeding ought to be taken after decision comes in the court having competent jurisdiction, as evident from annexure -6 to the writ petition. Being not satisfied with the explanation of the petitioner the respondent No. 4 has passed order of dismissal contained in District Force Order No. 1343/2011 contained in Memo No. 2825 dated 20.05.2011 vide annexure -7 to the writ application. Being aggrieved by the order of dismissal dated 20.05.2011, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 29.07.2011 before the appellate authority i.e. D.I.G., Bokaro (respondent No. 3) stating inter alia therein that the allegation levelled through the memo of charges being Memo No. 394 dated 21.12.2009 is totally false and fabricated, a copy of the said appeal filed by the petitioner dated 29.07.2011 has been annexed as annexure -8 to the writ petition. The appellate authority dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner vide District Force Order No. 2389/2012 contained in Memo No. 945 dated 08.10.2012, vide annexure -9 to the writ petition. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid order of dismissal as well as order passed by the appellate authority, the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the Director General of Police, Jharkhand (respondent No. 2) on 21.11.2012 which has been dismissed vide order dated 13.01.2014 and are marked as annexures -10 and 10A to the writ application. It has been averred in the writ application that the criminal proceeding which was initiated in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur wherein the petitioner has been acquitted vide order dated 13.08.2013 passed in Bihta P.S. Case No. 109 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. No. 1052 of 2010 has been marked as annexure -12 to the writ application. Basing on the aforesaid facts, the writ application has been filed by the petitioner invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievance. Per contra, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 4 repelling the averments made in the writ application. In the counter affidavit, it has been inter alia submitted that the petitioner has been dismissed from the services of police constable on the basis of the charges for which he has been found guilty in departmental proceeding vide 22/2010, during his posting at Bokaro District Police Force. His legally wedded wife Smt. Sushma Devi complained before the Superintendent of Police, Bokaro as the petitioner physically and mentally tortured her and without any consent/information, petitioner has solemnized second marriage with Priyanka, therefore, the petitioner's wife filed a case against the petitioner vide Bihta P.S. Case No. 109 of 2010 under Section 498A, 494 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act. It is further submitted in the counter affidavit that on 09.11.2009 legally wedded wife of the petitioner Sushma Devi complained before the S.P. Bokaro and immediately S.P. Bokaro suspended the present petitioner with immediate effect vide Bokaro District Order No. 2641/2009. Thereafter, on 21.12.2009 a departmental proceeding initiated against the suspended police 879 Amit Kumar Singh (petitioner) and, accordingly, charge has been framed against the petitioner and Circle Inspector, B.S. City was deputed as the presiding officer of the departmental proceeding 22/2010 against the petitioner. The petitioner has submitted his show cause on 21.02.2010 and he faced the departmental proceeding. The conducting officer of the departmental proceeding made due enquiry and recorded the written statement of witnesses namely S.I. Rajiv Ranjan Prasad, R.S.I. -1 -Binod Kumar, confidential reader -Sushma Devi. Petitioner has submitted his show cause. On 30.04.2010 the Conducting Officer submitted his final report vide departmental proceeding No. 22/2010 in which he found the petitioner guilty of the charges made against him in the departmental proceeding and on the basis of the final report submitted by the Conducting Officer, Superintendent of Police, Bokaro agreeing with said report dismissed the petitioner from services vide Memo No. 3045/conf. dated 19.05.2010 which was communicated to the petitioner vide memo No. 2372/r.k. dated 22.05.2010. The said order was also confirmed vide order dated 28.12.2010 and the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Deputy Inspector General Police, Coal Range, Bokaro for setting aside the order of the respondent No. 4. But, the appellate authority confirmed the order of the respondent No. 4 and the revision petition filed by the petitioner before the Director General -cum -Inspector General, which has also been confirmed by order dated 17.01.2014. Therefore, the petitioner has been given adequate opportunity to defend his case before the disciplinary authority, appellate authority as well as the revisional authority and the order passed by the respondents have been passed after following the principles of natural justice. With the aforesaid submissions prayer has been made for dismissal of the writ petition.
(3.) HEARD Mr. Ajay Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner and J.C. to A.G., appearing for the respondents.;