Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for issuance of writ/direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 08.04.2015 issued by the respondent No. 4 pertaining to dismissal from services and for direction to the respondents to forthwith reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits including full back wages.
(2.) The factual matrix, as has been delineated in the writ application, in a nutshell is that the petitioner joined service in the year 1988 as Junior Engineer, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar. After bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Bihar, the petitioner was allotted Jharkhand cadre and was posted as Junior Engineer under the Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand. In the year 2006 the petitioner was put on deputation under the Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand at the Rural Works Special Division, Potka Block, Jamshedpur. Thereafter the petitioner was deputed to Bahragora Block vide memo dated 09.01.2009. During his continuance at the deputed place of posting, a First Information Report was lodged on 23.08.2009 at the instance of the Block Development Officer, Potka, district East Singhbhum against 11 persons including the present petitioner on the allegation that no work was done under the projects and fabricated measurements were entered in the measurement books, based on which funds have been released, which resulted in defalcation of the Government money under 12 projects in Potka under N.R.E.G.A scheme. On the basis of the said F.I.R., a joint enquiry report dated 11.08.2009 was prepared under the Block Development Officer, Potka under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act and the gist of the charge was that no work was done under the projects and fabricated measurements have been entered in the measurement books, based on which funds have been released. In the departmental proceeding the inquiry officer submitted the report. In the inquiry report, Charge Nos. 1, 2, 4, 10 and 12 have been proved. Charge Nos. 3, 5 and 7 are marginally proved and Charge Nos. 6, 8, 9 and 11 are not proved. Thereafter, a second show cause notice was issued to the petitioner, and the petitioner submitted his reply to the second show cause notice inter alia taking the plea of pendency of criminal proceeding on the same set of charges. Surprisingly, after lapse of two years another show cause was issued to the petitioner vide memo dated 19.12.2014. Again, the petitioner submitted his second show cause reply on 21.01.2015. Thereafter, punishment order of dismissal from services was passed against the petitioner vide memo dated 08.04.2015 issued by the Engineer in Chief -I, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand vide Annexure -11 to the writ application. It has been submitted in the writ application that on perusal of the report dated 21.12.2009 it is evident that the value of total loss under 12 projects in question is Rs. 23,65,021/ - which is more than the amount which has been paid, amounting thereby that there is no question of defalcation or work not being done and the said report dated 21.12.2009 has been annexed as Annexure -12 to the writ application. It is also submitted that the report which was prepared on 11.08.2011 by the Assistant Engineer, Rural Works Special Division, Jamshedpur, indicates that the value of total works executed under 12 projects in question is Rs. 25,39,269/ - which is more than the amount which has been paid, which implies that no question of defalcation or work not being done, copy of the report dated 11.08.2011 is annexed as Annexure -13 to the writ application. It is also submitted that the B.D.O., Potka vide letter dated 06.01.2011 wrote to the Deputy Development Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur admitting that the work has been done for Rs. 24,33,174/ - which is more than the amount has been paid and requested to absolve the petitioner from the charges, thereby clearly implying that there is no question of fabricating measurement by the petitioner and the letter has been annexed as Annexurre -14 to the writ application. Being aggrieved by the impugned order of dismissal from services, left with no alternative, efficacious and speedy remedy, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court for redressal of his grievance.
(3.) Per contra, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents controverting the averments made in the writ application. In the counter affidavit, it has been inter alia stated that while the petitioner was deputed to Bahragora Block vide memo dated 09.01.2009, a First Information Report was lodged on 23.08.2009 at the instance of the Block Development Officer, Potka against 11 persons including the present petitioner inter alia alleging that no work was done under the projects and fabricated measurements were entered in the measurement books, based on which funds have been released and, thus, the accused persons have defalcated Government money under N.R.E.G.A Scheme. The F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of the joint enquiry report dated 11.08.2009 prepared under the Block Development Officer, Potka. It has further been submitted that in the charges the evidence of proving the said charge was (i) the joint enquiry report dated 11.08.2009 prepared under the Block Development Officer, Potka and (ii) the FIR itself, thereby making it clear that the departmental proceeding under the memo of charge was initiated for the very same set of events, and the occurrence for which the criminal case was lodged even the very basis and evidence for both being the same. It has been submitted that after scrutinizing all the evidences against the petitioner, dismissal order was passed and that too on the recommendation of Rural Development Department (RDD), therefore, there is absolutely no illegality or infirmity in the departmental proceeding.;