Jharkhand High Court
Ram Prakash Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 April, 2019
Author: Rajesh Kumar
Bench: Rajesh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No.3991 of 2009
Ram Prakash Singh ...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Director General of Police, Jharkhand
3. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand Armed Police,
Ranchi
4. Commandant, Jharkhand Armed Police-5, Deoghar
...... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
-----
For the Petitioner :Mr.Diwakar Upadhyay, Adv.
For the Respondents :AC to AG
----
08/Dated: 04/04/2019
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.02.2008 passed by the Disciplinary Authority as well as Appellate Order dated 27.06.2008 passed by the Appellate Authority, wherein the petitioner had been inflicted with the punishment of stoppage of one increment for six months.
As per the petitioner, he had been appointed in the year 1965 on the post of Constable. He has been charged vide Memo dated 02.01.2008 for remaining absent from duty from 19.09.2007. The said charge had been replied by the petitioner on 16.01.2008. In reply, the allegation had been made against Arjun Oraon, Inspecting Officer that he was in drunken position and wrong report had been submitted by him against the petitioner and others.
Facing such a situation, independent Inquiry Officer had been appointed, namely, Parsuram Jha, Dy. S.P-cum-Investigating Officer. After conducting enquiry, the inquiry report had been submitted on 27.02.2008, wherein it had been found that the petitioner was guilty of the charge.
Considering the said inquiry report, order of punishment had been passed by the Commandant on 28.02.2008, who is not the Inspecting Authority rather he had acted as a Disciplinary/Higher authority to pass the order.
Being aggrieved, petitioner had filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, who is the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand Armed Forces, Ranchi. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand Armed Forces, Ranchi, after considering the entire matter as well as after considering the defence of the petitioner, had rejected the appeal vide order dated 27.06.2008 (Annexure-6) and thereafter the order of punishment had been upheld.
The petitioner has mainly relied that Inspecting Authority was in drunken position and as such, upon his inspection report, the order of punishment cannot be inflicted.
Learned counsel for the State on the other hand has submitted that the petitioner is governed by Rule 828 (C) of the Bihar Police Manual, which is relevant and quoted hereinunder:-
"Rule 828 (C) In case in which, forfeiture of increment is proposed to be an adequate punishment, this may be inflicted without formal enquiry in the form of a proceeding but every such, matter shall state clearly: first, the charges against the defaulter; then his answers to each charge of the officer inflicting the punishment. In such cases, the Superintendent need not hold the enquiry himself, nor shall the delinquent have the right to appear before him, but he has the right to appear before the officer deputed to record the evidence and to take his defence; and such officer, who shall not be below the rank of inspector, shall come to a clear finding on each charge and shall submit the record with his recommendations to the Superintendent for orders."
It has been further submitted that initially Arjun Oraon (ASI), Inspecting Officer had reported against the petitioner and after considering the show cause submitted by the petitioner, an independent authority had been appointed, who is higher authority than the Inspecting Authority for making an enquiry. In an independent inquiry, petitioner had been found guilty and the order of punishment had been passed by the Disciplinary Authority i.e. Commandant, who is much higher than that authority on whose inspection, proceeding had been initiated.
In view of above discussion, this Court finds no merit in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Shahid/