- (1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia, prayed for quashing Office Order dated 02.06.2005 (Annexure 7) passed by Chiarman-cum-Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, who by the said order has dismissed the petitioner from services, apart from awarding following punishments: (a).The petitioner would not be entitled to anything apart from the subsistence allowance paid during the period of suspension; (b).To recover a sum of Rs. 14,000/- from the salary and arrears of the petitioner equivalent to the loss suffered by the Corporation on account of theft/loot of foodgrains from Pirtand Godown of the Corporation.
(2.) Sans details, the facts as disclosed in the writ application, in a nutshell, is that initially the petitioner was appointed as Grade IV employee under respondents-corporation in the year 1975. Thereafter, the petitioner continued to discharge his duties to the utmost satisfaction of the authorities. While continuing as such, a charge-sheet dated 20.01.2005 was served upon the petitioner, in which, five charges were framed against the petitioner and in pursuance to the said charges, the petitioner submitted his show cause reply, which on being found unsatisfactory, enquiry officer was appointed, who conducted the enquiry and found the petitioner guilty of the charges. Basing on the findings of the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority passed the impugned order dated 02.06.2005, which is being assailed in the writ application.
(3.) Per contra, counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4 repelling the contentions made in the writ application. It has been, inter alia, submitted that the petitioner was serving as a Night Guard since 04.04.1975 and in the year 2004, while posted at Pirtand Block (District: Giridih) Foodgrain Godown, the petitioner left his duties without any sanctioned leave on 28.09.2004 and returned on 13.10.2004. In the meantime, in the night of 28/29.09.2004, foodgrains from Pirtand Godown was stolen causing loss to the Corporation to the tune of Rs. 14,000/-. On return, explanation was called from the petitioner for the said unauthorized absence, which on being found unsatisfactory, the petitioner was put under suspension and domestic enquiry was conducted, witnesses were examined and conducting officer having found his show cause reply unsatisfactory found him guilty of the charges. Basing upon the said enquiry report, the respondents-authorities passed the impugned order.;