- (1.) BOTH the appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 9.10.2002 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 2134/ 99(R) by which the learned Single Judge was pleased to allow the writ petition observing therein that the obvious consequence will follow.
(2.) IN order to explain the controversy it may be relevant to state that while the petitioner/respondent herein was posted as god own incharge in a godown at Khunti which was functioning under the Department of Irrigation, it was alleged that he was involved in the theft of iron rods which took place in a god own situated at Khunti in the State of Jharkhand. A First Information Report therefore, was lodged on account of this theft in which the petitioner/respondent was charge -sheeted. Simultaneously a departmental proceeding also was initiated against the petitioner/ respondent and while the criminal trial was pending against the petitioner/respondent, the departmental proceeding stood concluded and as a result of the conclusion of the departmental proceeding, the petitioner/respondent was dismissed from service. However, after conclusion of the criminal case the petitioner/respondent herein was acquitted of the charge of theft and on account of his acquittal, he filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge challenging the order of his dismissal. 3) JLJR 299 wherein a bodyguard who was prosecuted for an offence under Sections 363, 366A and 376/120B I.P.C. having been acquitted in the criminal case who was also departmentally proceeded, it was found that the departmental proceeding could not have been allowed to proceed.
(3.) IN the instant matter since there is no categorical order of the learned Single Judge as to whether he has set aside the termination order, a reasonable inference can be drawn from the order that the departmental proceeding was fit to be stayed when the criminal trial was proceeding. The learned Single Judge had, thus, allowed the writ petition and was pleased to observe that obvious consequence will follow. The obvious consequence obviously would be an inference to set aside the order of dismissal of the petitioner/respondent herein.;