SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR,J. - (1.) Challenging charge-memo dated 07.12.2015, the petitioner has approached this Court.
(2.) Briefly stated, the petitioner, who was appointed on 01.09.1981 as Assistant on probation, was confirmed in service of the respondent Life Insurance Corporation of India with effect from 01.12.1981. His appointment was under reserved category for which he has submitted caste certificate dated 04.05.1981. He claims that he belongs to Sub-caste "Sunri". Subsequently, when it was found that the caste certificate produced by the petitioner was not in prescribed format he was asked to submit a fresh caste certificate. The petitioner in purported compliance of the aforesaid direction produced a caste certificate dated 16.12.1983 signed by Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad whereas, the caste certificate should have been signed by the District Magistrate of the concerned district. Subsequently, the matter was reported by the Chief Vigilance Officer of the Corporation to Dy. Secretary, Cabinet (Vigilance) Department, Government of Bihar for conducting an investigation and consequently, G.R.Case No. 1343/1986 was initiated in which he was made an accused. Since the prosecution failed to produced any witness, charges framed against the accused persons failed and they were acquitted by judgment and order dated 14.02.2008 in G.R.Case No. 1343A/1986. Thereafter, the petitioner was directed to submit a fresh caste certificate, however, inspite of directions issued vide letters dated 08.11.2011, 20.03.2012 and 13.05.2015 when the petitioner did not submit a fresh caste certificate, charge-memo dated 07.12.2015 was served upon him, to which he submitted his reply on 12.01.2016. Finding no substance in his defence, a departmental enquiry was ordered vide order dated 29.01.2016. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the instant writ-petition.
(3.) Referring to the decisions in Kumari Madhuri Patil and Anr. v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and Ors. reported in AIR 1995 SC 94 and Union of India and Ors. v. B.V. Gopinath reported in AIR (2014) SC 88, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Corporation has no jurisdiction to decide the genuineness of the caste certificate produced by the petitioner and the Corporation also cannot determine the caste of an employee.;