- (1.) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of his dismissal dated 10.2.2003 passed against him by the respondent No.8 and has also prayed for his reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a constable in the police force on the recommendation of the then Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna as a special case for appointment on consideration of the exemplary courage, showed by him in assisting the Special Police Task Force which was constituted for curbing criminal activities of criminals within the district of Palamau. His appointment was made by order dated 26.3.1997 issued from the office of Director General -cum -Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna. While granting him appointment on special consideration, the fact that the petitioner's height was two inches less than the prescribed standard of height, was overlooked and ignored and since the petitioner was having a good knowledge in computer operation, he was posted on his appointment as a computer operator in the police force and deputed to work in the office of Inspector General of Police, Chhotanagpur Region, Ranchi. Since the date of his appointment, the petitioner continued to render his services and after bifurcation of erstwhile State of Bihar, he was given Jharkhand cadre on the same post in the Ranchi District Police Force. After having served for more than five years, he was served with a show cause notice on 12.6.2002 issued by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi. It was stated in the show cause notice that since the Government of Bihar had declared that the appointment of constables made on special grounds, being contrary to the rules applicable for appointment, such appointments were declared illegal by the State of Bihar and the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why his services should not be terminated. The reply to the show cause notice filed by the petitioner was not accepted and consequently the petitioner filed a writ application before this court vide W.P.(S) No. 3853 of 2002. While disposing of the writ application on 11.7.2002, this court had issued a direction to the respondent in the following terms: - "In the facts and circumstances, competent authority of the State of Jharkhand IS directed not to implement the letter NO.1 046 dated 7.3.2002 mechanically. Competent authority may give notice to petitioner and call for records from the State of Bihar and then to take any decision in accordance with law. Competent authority of State of Jharkhand should act in respect of show cause notice given to the petitioner vide Memo No. 2762 dated 12.6.2002 in the light of observation aforesaid. " The petitioner's contention is that in spite of above orders of this court, the respondents did not call for the records from the State of Bihar which would otherwise have established that the petitioner's appointment was made after observance of all the rules of the police manual. Instead, the petitioner was directed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi by notice dated 4.1.2003 to file his fresh show cause replies. The replies submitted by the petitioner on 8.1.2003 was rejected by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi and by the impugned order dated 10.2.2003, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi terminated the services of the petitioner.
(3.) THE petitioner has assailed the impugned order of termination of his services on the following grounds: - (a) That the show cause notice and the impugned order of termination was passed against him pursuant to the directions/communications of the Government of Bihar and the Director General -cum -Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna declaring therein that the Government of Bihar had termed the appointment of the petitioner as illegal. After the bifurcation of erstwhile State of Bihar under the provisions of Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 and on cadre division, the petitioner was recognized as a Government servant under the police force of the State of Jharkhand. The State of Bihar therefore, ceased to have any authority or control or supervision with respect to the public servants posted in the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand and could not therefore, have issued any directions which could have the affect of termination of the petitioner's service. (b) That before terminating the petitioner's service, no reasonable opportunity was given to him to defend his case nor was any departmental proceeding initiated on the basis of any charges against him. (c) That the plea that the petitioner's appointment was not made in accordance with the rules or procedure, cannot be applied against the petitioner since the petitioner's appointment was made according to the administrative orders of the Director General of Police on special grounds and the rules framed for appointment on special/compassionate grounds even without strict adherence to the general procedure for recruitment. (d) That the petitioner had served continuously for more than seven years and his dismissal from service is totally against the principles of natural justice and equity since even the State of Jharkhand, by relaxing its rules, has made appointments of more than 36 constables on special/compassionate grounds considering their exemplary courage shown in occasions of crisis and all such persons were appointed. as constables even without strict adherence to the prescribed rules or procedure. (e) That on considering the cases of other constables, similarly situated like the petitioner, the orders of their termination from services was quashed by this court in the several writ applications filed by them and they were reinstated in service and the petitioner also deserves the same benefit. ;