- (1.) Petitioner approached this Court inter alia for the following reliefs: "(a) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 13.04.2007 passed by appellate authority and the order dated 31.03.2004 passed by the Disciplinary Authority, respectively whereby and where under respondents have dismissed the petitioner from services and also quash the order dated 04.05.2009 passed in appeal memorial by Director General of Police cum Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi. (b) For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to reinstate the petitioner from the date of dismissal with all consequential benefits."
(2.) The brief facts argued by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner is that-Petitioner was appointed as Constable in the State of Bihar in the year, 1977 and was promoted to the post of Hawaldar in the year, 1987. While the petitioner was posted in Chaibasa, a charge sheet was served upon him alleging inter alia therein that petitioner started going in the residence of Miss. Elzina Badh, the resident of Hazaribagh Sadar by disclosing his identity as a father of Church. He used to send letters by writing in the name of other person and started sending to the residence of Miss. Elzina Badh. Thereafter, subsequently he developed friendship with Miss. Elzina Badh. When the father of Miss. Elzina Badh, came to know about this, he scolded the petitioner on which the petitioner misused his official position by showing his Pistol. It has been alleged that Miss. Elzina Badh was also threatened by the petitioner by saying her to get the news published in the daily newspaper and also alleged that he used to demand Rs. 3 lakhs. After developing relationship and friendship, he compelled Miss. Elzina Badh, to solemnize marriage with him. Second allegation is that one truck has been purchased in the name of son of the petitioner while petitioner was posted at Kumar Dungi, P.S. Mazhgaon, hence he used to give more attention towards the said Truck instead of giving attention towards his duty. Third allegation is that wife of the petitioner has made a complaint that petitioner has not given proper attention towards them due to which they are facing financial difficulties.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the basis of said memo of charge, a regular departmental proceeding had been initiated against him. The witnesses have been examined and cross-examined by the petitioner but merely on the presumption, the Enquiry Officer has come to a conclusion that the charge has been found to be proved against the petitioner.;