Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 440 (JHR)

Hari Bansh Pandey v. State Of Jharkhand

2008-04-10

AMARESHWAR SAHAY

body2008
ORDER Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned J.C. to G.A. appearing for the State of Bihar are present. However, Mr. H.K. Singh, learned Standing Counsel No. 1, appearing for the State of Jharkhand, is not present, which is a sorry State of affairs of the Standing Counsel 1. 2. By order dated 3.7.2006 this Court directed the Standing counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand to produce the relevant record of enquiry with regard to the enquiry conducted against the petitioner fixing the next date 12th July 2006. When on the next date fixed also the records was not produced then again by order dated 3.1.2008 the Standing counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand was directed to produce the same and fixed the case on 1.2.2008. 3. On 1.2.2008 also the said record was not produced. However, on that day Mr. H.K. Singh, learned standing counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand stated that all the relevant records with regard to enquiry conducted against the petitioner are lying with the State of Bihar at Patna since the enquiry was conducted at Patna and, therefore, the respondent State of Jharkhand is not in a position to produce the said records. 4. In view of the said statement made by the Standing counsel, this Court directed the counsel appearing for the State of Bihar to produce all the relevant records and the case was adjourned to 15th February, 2008. 5. Thereafter a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State of Bihar, wherein paragraphs 5 and 7 of the said counter affidavit are relevant to be noticed. In paragraph 7 it has been specifically stated that since the petitioners service was in Jharkhand State at the time of bifurcation of State of Bihar and therefore the concerned file Nig/Bira-64/99 was sent to the Secretary R.C.D. Jharkhand vide letter No. 5883 (S) dated 28.8.2001 as per his request and for compliance of the order of the Court for taking further action. A copy of the said letter has been annexed as Annexure-B to the counter affidavit. 6. Therefore, prima facie, it appears that not only the deponent, who has filed counter affidavit on behalf of the State of Jharkhand, but the Standing counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand mislead this Court by making wrong statement before this Court. A copy of the said letter has been annexed as Annexure-B to the counter affidavit. 6. Therefore, prima facie, it appears that not only the deponent, who has filed counter affidavit on behalf of the State of Jharkhand, but the Standing counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand mislead this Court by making wrong statement before this Court. This Court in order to verify the matter and in order to know the actual facts wanted assistance of the Standing counsel, but he has found to be absent. When this Court sent information to the Standing counsel, his junior only appeared in Court but he could not assist this Court then he was instructed to inform the Standing counsel to appear before this Court for proper assistance, but inspite of information given the Standing counsel did not choose to appear before this Court. The State of affairs clearly shows his irresponsible behaviour and indifferent attitude which has been viewed by this Court very seriously. In this view of the matter this Court has no option but to direct the deponent Vijay Bahadur Singh, the Assistant Engineer Road Subdivision, Ramgarh, as well as respondent No. 5, the Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Division, Hazaribagh on whose behalf the counter affidavit has been filed, to appear personally before this Court on 24.4.2008 and to show cause why an appropriate action be not taken against them. 7. Let this application be listed on 24th April 2008. Let a copy of this order be served on the learned Advocate General as well as the Law Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, for appropriate action to be taken in the matter against the concerned persons.