- (1.) HEARD Ratna Prabha, learned counsel for the petitioner and J.C. to A.G. for the respondent State.
(2.) PETITIONER in this writ application has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the entire departmental proceeding No. 32/03 including the chargesheet dated 9.8.2003 (Annexure -1) issued by the Commandant, Jharkhand Armed Police -1 (Respondent No. 2) and also for quashing the order vide Memo No. 581/secret dated 18.12.2003 (Annexure -5) issued by the Respondent No. 2 whereby the petitioner was punished by way of dismissal from service. Prayer has also been made for quashing the order dated 5.5.200' (Annexure -7) whereby petitioner's appeal against the order of his dismissal from service, has been rejected. A further prayer has been made for an order quashing the Memo No. 382/P dated 7.4.2005 whereby the petitioner's prayer for reinstatement on the ground of his acquittal in the criminal proceeding, has been rejected. The petitioner was employed as a Sweeper in the Jharkhand Armed Police -1. On the basis of a complaint/F.I.R, lodged on 30.7.2003 by one Meena Gautam, who was purportedly employed in the petitioner's house as a domestic help, containing allegation that she was sexually exploited by the petitioner, a criminal case was instituted against him. On the same allegation, a chargesheet was served upon the petitioner in contemplation of a departmental proceeding and the petitioner, after being placed under suspension, was proceeded againsl departmentally.
(3.) WHILE the criminal trial remained pending, the departmental proceeding continued and in due course, the enquiry was concluded. The Enquiry Officer found the charges against the petitioner proved and on the basis of the report submitted by him, the Disciplinary Authority proceeded to pass the impugned order (Annexure -5) of termination of the petitioner's service albeit after serving a second show cause notice upon the petitioner alongwith a copy of the enquiry report. The petitioner thereafter preferred an appeal against the order of his termination before the Appellate Authority but the same was dismissed by the impugned order (Annexure -7).;