Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 17.08.2010, passed by the Principal Secretary, Government of Jharkhand and further for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents for payment of the retiral benefits and for fixation of pension in view of the last pay drawn after quashing of the aforesaid order dated 17.08.2010.
(2.) Sans details, the facts as disclosed in the writ application, in a nutshell is that the petitioner was appointed as a Sub-Inspector of Police on 01.07.1976 in the erstwhile State of Bihar and belongs to reserve category. It has been averred in the writ application that the petitioner was promoted as Inspector of Police in the year 1982 and remained posted at several places in the erstwhile State of Bihar. It has been submitted that in the year 2004, the petitioner was promoted as Dy.S.P. and remained posted in several districts of erstwhile State of Bihar. It has been stated that in the year 2005, after cadre division, the petitioner was allotted the State of Jharkhand and was posted as Vigilance Dy. S.P. where he remained posted up to December, 2005. It has been further averred that in the month of January, 2006, the petitioner was posted as Sub-Divisional Police, Barhi. It has been further submitted that the petitioner was posted as Rail Dy.S.P. in Jamshedpur on 04.04.2011 from where he superannuated on 31.12.2011. It has been further stated that while the petitioner was posted in the district of Jamshedpur as Rail Dy.S.P., charges were framed against him and a proceeding was initiated in view of the FIR lodged against him in Saraidhela Police Station of Dhanbad as Saraidhela P.S. Case No. 332 of 2008. It has been further averred that against the charges, the petitioner filed a show cause reply dated 06.10.2009. The Enquiry Officer did not consider the show cause reply of the petitioner and a proceeding was initiated vide Departmental Proceeding No. 51 of 22. It has been further stated that before the Enquiry Officer, the petitioner filed his second show cause reply. It has been further averred that the Enquiry Officer before coming to the findings of guilt, asked a final show cause reply and the petitioner filed the same on 02.02.2010. It has been further stated that the Enquiry Officer did not consider the show cause reply and held the petitioner guilty of the charges. It has been further averred that the basis of the departmental proceeding was a criminal case against the petitioner and in the said criminal case, proceedings have been stayed by the Court and the petitioner has been enlarged on bail. The entire family of the petitioner was implicated in the criminal case which shows the mala fide intention of the complainant. The Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of the charges and forwarded the copy to the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority, the Principal Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, passed an order of punishment by the order of the Governor of the State vide order dated 17.08.2010. Against the order dated 17.08.2010, the petitioner preferred appeal for reviewing the order dated 17.08.2010 but the said appeal was also rejected vide order dated 01.10.2011. The petitioner has challenged the order of the Disciplinary Authority as well as the Appellate Authority. Left with no other efficacious, alternative and speedy remedy, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.
(3.) Heard Mr. (Dr.) S.N. Pathak, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Chanchal Jain, learned J.C. to A.A.G. for the respondent-State.;