Kapildeo Sharma vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 November, 2014
Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon decision of Dr.
Rabindra Nath Singh vs The State of Bihar and others reported in 1983
BBCJ page 33 wherein it has been held that consideration means application
of mind. Having relied upon the decision, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that from perusal of letter dated 24.07.2014, it would appear that
there was complete non-application of mind by the concerned authority for
cancellation of the pension of the petitioner. The second contention of the
petitioner is that the Union of India cancelled the pension of the petitioner
having relied upon recommendation of the State Government but prior to
Patna High Court CWJC No.10484 of 2008 (16) dt.18-11-2014 3
cancellation of the pension, neither the State Government nor the Union of
India furnished relevant documents to the petitioner and what to say to other
documents, Union of India did not even take pain to supply enquiry report of
the State of Bihar to the petitioner. Therefore, the above stated conduct of the
authority of the Union of India and the State of Bihar is nothing but only
violation of natural justice. He further points out that after cancellation of
pension of the petitioner, the District Magistrate, Jehanabad has ordered for
institution of FIR against the petitioner and, therefore, it is expedient in the
interest of justice that till final decision of this writ petition, no coercive step
should be taken against the petitioner.