- (1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for following reliefs: - W.P.(S ) No. 3651 of 2002 In the present writ petition the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ/order/direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing of office order no. 1686 dated 10.5.2002 by which the Joint Secretary, Patna, Bihar State Electricity Board (respondent no.1) has dismissed the petitioner from the service with immediate effect and for issuance of an appropriate writ commanding upon the concerned respondents to revoke the dismissal order of the petitioner. In the present writ petition the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the concerned respondents to immediately and forthwith release the legally payable dues of the petitioner which has not been paid to the petitioner till date. The second writ petition has been preferred for consequential benefit/relief which is dependant on the first writ petition and thus, both the writ petitions are disposed of by this common order.
(2.) THE facts, in brief, are set out as under: The petitioner was appointed as Junior Accounts Clerk on 28.6.1967 in the office of Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. After bifurcation of State as per his option he was allocated to Jharkhand State and continued therein. According to the petitioner, he worked with full satisfaction with respondent Board and had a unblemished service record till 1996. A departmental enquiry was initiated against him on 2.11.1998 and the enquiry officer was appointed to conduct the proceeding and after giving opportunities to the petitioner he submitted enquiry report on 27.8.2001 and as per his report the charges levelled against the petitioner was found to be proved. The charges levelled against the petitioner relate to illegal realization of money from the consumers on alleged charges of meter tampering. The charges framed against the petitioner are as under: 1. During his tenure in January, 1986, with a view to black mail the consumer namely Jaybali Dubey he prepared wrong energy bill amounting to Rs.4977/ - whereas actual bill due was Rs.14/ - only and for that reason meter reading of that consumer was found ˜zero'. 2. In the month of June 1986, with a view to black mail the consumer namely, Kameshwar Sahay he prepared wrong energy bill amounting to Rs.5772/ - whereas actual bill dues was Rs.385/ - only and in this regard audit team also reported that an excess bill of Rs.5335.85 was found against the said consumer. 3. He adjusted a sum of Rs.1506.86 towards the bill charged against one consumer namely, Ram Ratan Singh without recommendation or order passed by superior authority. 4. He prepared an average bill in spite of correct meter of consumers namely, Shyam Lal and Jerrudin Ansari and after fulfillment of his personal interest, he adjusted the same. Finally, the joint secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board vide its impugned order dated 10.5.2002 after giving second show cause notice on 12.2.2002 dismissed the petitioner from service which is sought to be challenged in the present writ petition. After dismissal, being agriieved by the conduct of the concerned respondent authority the petitioner preferred a representation on 23.4.2004 for payment of his admissible dues which is still pending. He preferred the present Writ Petition (S) No.3360/2007 for payment of dues of salary for the period from 1.4.1992 to 22.4.1992 along with interest, payment of subsistence allowance to him for the period from 23.4.94 to 22.1.96, dues of increment w.e.f. 1994 to 2002 along with interest and pecuniary benefits of pay revision from 1.4.97 to 31.10.2000, transfer allowance on account of transfer from Gomia Sub -Division to Ganeshpur Sub -Division and amount of G.S.S. which has been deduced since May, 1987. The respondent Board in their reply submitted that full opportunity was given including Second Show Cause Notice and since it is a case of dismissal for misconduct and thus the question of payment of salary and other dues as claimed was not maintainable.
(3.) THE main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board had no jurisdiction to dismiss the petitioner from service after cadre allocation and bifurcation of State since at the relevant time he was working at Nirsa, Dhanbad when the charges was framed and even at the time of dismissal in 2002 he was within the territorial jurisdiction of State of Jharkhand. In this regard, he has referred to and relied upon 2002 (2) JCR pg. 602 and 2002(1) JCR pg. 401 to support his contention.;