- (1.) This writ application is directed against the order dated 8.3.2003 (Annexure 13) passed by Deputy General Manager (DNW), Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro, respondent No. 2 whereby the petitioner was dismissed from the service of the Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro. Further prayer is to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner with immediate effect.
(2.) The case of the petitioner is that late Jatadhari Pandey and Damurdhari Pandey, both sons of late Sridam Pandey were having landed properties situated in Mouza Patharkotha which were acquired by the Steel Authority of India Limited for the purpose of establishing Bokaro Steel Plant at Bokaro. Accordingly, a joint award in terms of Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act was passed in favour of Devendra Pandey and his brothers, all sons of Damurdhari Pandey and Jathadhari Pandey who had only one daughter, namely, Smt. Jyotibala Pandey (mother of the petitioner) who was living with her father for taking care of him. As the land was acquired for setting up Bokaro Steel Plant, the persons whose lands were acquired, got displaced and under the scheme of giving employment to the displaced persons, a survey was conducted by the Director, Project Land and Rehabilitation (DPLR) under the direction of the then Government of Bihar to identify families, who have been displaced on account of land being acquired.
(3.) The petitioner was also found to be a member of the displaced family and a certificate with that respect bearing No. 297 dated 15.2.1971 was issued to the petitioner and hence, his name as well as names of other displaced persons were sent by the then Director, Project Land and Rehabilitation to the employment exchange, Bokaro Steel City under a list in which petitioner s name finds mentioned at serial No. 91. The employment exchange, in turn, forwarded the name of the petitioner and others to the authority of Bokaro Steel Limited for appointment to the post of khalasl On that basis, the petitioner was called for interview by the Selection Committee to which the then Director, Project Land and Rehabilitation, who had issued the displaced certificate, was also one of the members. The petitioner having been found suitable, was appointed for the post of khalasi and was allowed to join on 15.4.1973. Further case is that when the petitioner had put in service for about 28 years, a letter dated 21.9.2001 (Annexure 7) was received by the petitioner whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why not disciplinary action be taken against him on account of misconduct as he had obtained employment in Bokaro Steel Plant by virtue of displaced certificate No. 297 dated 15.2.1997 which, according to the Director, Project, Land and Rehabilitation, is forged on account of the fact that displaced certificate No. 297 relates to one Rashik Mahto of village Sanjori. On getting said notice, the petitioner submitted an application making request to supply certain information as the charge mentioned under Annexure 7 according to the petitioner was quite vague. But the authorities instead of supplying the said information, asked the petitioner to submit his reply which the petitioner submitted. However, the same was not found to be satisfactory and hence, a proceeding was initiated. Thereupon the petitioner filed his written statement stating therein that displaced certificate issued to the petitioner bears the number 297 dated 15.2.1971 whereas displaced certificate issued to Rashik Mahto bears the number 227 dated 17.11.1970 and that relates to village Sanjori whereas in the case of petitioner, certificate of displacement relates to village Patherkatta and, therefore, enquiry officer was requested to s get it verified.;