- (1.) This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 17.2.2003 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3056 of 1998(P), whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the finding recorded in the departmental proceeding is not perverse and, thereby affirmed the order of dismissal passed by the disciplinary authorities.
(2.) The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: The appellant was a constable posted with Shri S.R. Sabarwal, Superintendent of Police (Training) at Hazaribagh. The appellant s case is that Shri Sabarwal used to live in one of the guest rooms of the I.P. Mess, and the appellant used to live in one of the rooms meant for orderly and servants. Shri Sabarwal used to proceed Patna a number of times as his family being at Patna. Many of times, the petitioner was also sent to Patna in connection with official and personal work of the aforesaid Officer.
(3.) It appears that a departmental proceeding was initiated against the appellant vide charge-sheet dated 25th July, 1988. The following three charges were leveled against him: (i) The appellant availed the leave from 01.7.1988 to 02.7.1988 but the leave allegedly shown upto 11.7.1988, (ii) The appellant charged Rs. 51/- being the railway fare from Patna to Kodarma when actual fair paid was Rs. 25/- and (iii) The appellant committed theft of Rs. 2000/- from the room of S.R. Sabarwal, Superintendent of Police (Training), while he was posted as Orderly. The appellant asserted that on 21st July, 1988 he proceeded on leave granted by Mr. Sabarwal and went to his village home. On 22nd July, 1988, the Sub-Inspector of Sadar P.S., Hazaribagh along with one Havildar visited his house and informed that Shri Sabarwal lodged F.I.R. against him alleging theft of Rs. 2000/-. The petitioner was forced and the S.I. and the Havildar succeeded in extorting a sum of Rs. 4000/- from the father and uncle of the appellant. The appellant was then brought before Shir Sabarwal from where he was sent to jail, but he was admittedly enlarged on bail. The appellant s case is that at the instance of Shri Sabarwal, he was illegally made accused in a criminal case.;