Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) At the sunset of his service when the petitioner was expecting a peaceful retirement in March, 2018, in an otherwise unblemished career he found himself embroiled in a controversy over inadequate courtesies extended to the members of the Public Accounts Committee, Jharkhand. After his appeal against the penalty order dated 02.02.2016 was dismissed by an order dated 03.03.2017, he has approached this Court.
(2.) Briefly stated, the petitioner, who was appointed on 25.02.1986 as Child Development Project Officer, was posted as Deputy Development Commissioner, Garhwa on 17.04.2015. In connection to the forthcoming visit of Public Accounts Committee, Jharkhand on 09.01.2016 at Garhwa, the Deputy Commissioner issued an order on 05.01.2016, whereunder the petitioner was assigned some responsibility. It appears that on complaints made by the members of the Committee, an enquiry was conducted by the Commissioner, Palamau Division and a report was submitted on 15.01.2016. There were complaints of inadequate water supply, nonavailability of blanket and not providing food of their choice. It was rumoured that some of the members of the Committee were in drunken condition. The Committee consisted of Chairman and six Hon'ble members besides six officers. In all the delegation consisted of about 3035 persons, and for accommodating them rooms were booked in hotel. Allegation against the petitioner is that when the Deputy Commissioner informed him about the complaints received from one of the members namely, Dr. Irfan Ansari he did not visit the circuit house.
(3.) Pursuant to order dated 25.08.2017, original record of the case was produced in the Court on 29.08.2017. Order dated 29.08.2017 records that before penalty order dated 02.02.2016 was passed no showcause notice was issued to the petitioner. Rule 55A of Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930 reads as under: "Without prejudice to the provisions of rule 55, no order imposing the penalty specified in clauses (i), (ii) or (iv) of rule 49 (other than an order based on facts which led to his conviction in a Criminal Court or by a CourtMartial, or an order superseding him for promotion to a higher post on the ground of his unfitness for that post) on any government servant to whom these rules are applicable shall be passed unless he has been given an adequate opportunity of making any representation that he may desire to make any such representation, if any, has been taken into consideration before the order is passed. Provided that the requirements of this rule may for sufficient reasons to be recorded in writing, be waived where there is difficulty in observing them and where they can be waived without injustice to the officer concerned.";