- (1.) THE appellant, who was in the services of the State, while posted as Junior Statistical Supervisor in District Statistic Office, Purnea, regarding five charges a departmental proceeding was initiated against him and on the basis of the report, submitted by the enquiry officer, he was removed from service vide order No. 475 dated 24th April, 1976. The appeal, preferred against the said order, having been rejected, the petitioner moved before the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4290 of 1981, wherein the order of removal was set aside by a Division Bench of Patna High Court on 23rd March, 1984. Liberty was given to the enquiry officer to obtain specimen signatures of one Dharnidhar Jha and the petitioner and to get the opinion of handwriting expert before giving a final finding. The appellant was, thereafter, re -appointed and continued in service.
(2.) ACCORDING to the counsel for the appellant, the respondents also decided to drop the proceeding vide Memo No. 2127, dated 9th September, 1987 (Annexure 2 to the memo of appeal). According to the appellant, he was reappointed vide order No. 11/81 -22, dated 7th January, 1985 (Memo No. 56, dated 7th January, 1985). By the said order, while he was re -appointed, at paragraph No. 2 of the said order it was mentioned that the decision with regard to the suspension period shall be taken later on whereas at paragraph No. 3 it was ordered that the departmental proceeding will continue and separate order relating to the proceeding shall be issued. By subsequent order, contained in Memo No. 2127, dated 9th September, 1987", the disciplinary authority ordered to read "reinstatement" in place of "reappointment" and also ordered to delete paragraph Nos. 2 and 3 of the office order, contained in Memo No. 56, dated 7th January, 1985. Thereafter, the decision to continue the departmental proceeding, as was made vide paragraph No. 3 of the order, contained in Memo No. 56, dated 7th January, 1985, was deleted, which, according to the appellant, amount to taking decision to drop the proceeding.
(3.) IT appears that in the year 1993, the petitioner was made to retire from service with effect from 31st October, 1993, which was challenged by him before Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6890 of 1994, wherein, allegation was made that his date of birth has been fabricated. The said writ petition was disposed on 13th April, 1995 with a direction to the respondents to make enquiry with regard to the date of birth and to pass final order,;