S.N.PATHAK,J. - (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) Petitioner has approached this Court with following prayers:- (I) To quash and set aside the penalty order contained in Notification dated 25.07.2018 (Annexure-10), issued by respondent No. 3, whereby 5% pension of the petitioner has been withheld for five years. (II) To quash and set aside the part of the second enquiry report dated 23.02.2017 (Annexure-7), whereby charge Nos. 1, 3 and 6 have been held to be proved. (III) To quash and set aside the notification dated 09.09.2016 (Annexure-5), issued by respondent No. 2, where a de novo enquiry was ordered to be conducted without following the procedure established by law. (IV) To direct the respondents to pay all consequential benefits to the petitioner.
(3.) The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner was appointed on 01.08.1983 to the post of Forester in the Forest Department of the unified State of Bihar. In the year 1999, he was promoted to the post of Range Forest Officer. On 15.11.2000, in view of provisions enshrined in the Bihar Re-organization Act, 2000, the services of the petitioner was allocated to the newly created State of Jharkhand. On 04.05.2013, while the petitioner was posted as Range Forest Officer, Mahuadanr Range, Palamu, charge was framed against the petitioner vide memo No. 1958 dated 04.05.2013 and the same was communicated to the petitioner by letter dated 24.05.2013. The petitioner submitted reply to the said memo vide letter dated 17.06.2013, denying the charges levelled against him. Thereafter, the Enquiry Officer conducted departmental proceeding and on 29.11.2013, submitted his enquiry report, in which out of seven charges, only charge No. 6 was held to be proved against the petitioner. However, till the date of petitioner's retirement i.e. 31.03.2016 no decision was taken by the respondent-authorities, in response to the enquiry report, and after his retirement, vide notification dated 31.05.2016, the respondents informed the petitioner that the proceeding pending against the petitioner was converted into a proceeding under Rule 43(b) of the Jharkhand Pension Rules, 2000 and vide notification dated 09.09.2016, a de novo enquiry was ordered against the petitioner by appointing a different Enquiry Officer. The petitioner submitted reply on 21.12.2016 to the said notification dated 09.09.2016 and thereafter, a second enquiry report was submitted on 23.02.2017, by the Second Enquiry Officer, in which, out of seven charges, three charges i.e. charge Nos. 1, 3 and 6 are held to be proved against the petitioner. Thereafter, second show-cause notice was issued to this petitioner vide letter dated 07.12.2017 to which the petitioner submitted his reply on 14.05.2018. Thereafter, impugned penalty order was passed vide notification dated 25.07.2018, whereby, 5% pension of the petitioner has been ordered to be withheld for five years. Aggrieved by the said penalty order, petitioner has knocked the door of this Court by filing the instant writ petition. ;