Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 873 (PAT)

Deo Chandra Choudhary v. State of Bihar

2008-07-07

body2008
ORDER On 2nd of April, 2003, the following order came to be issued. "Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the enquiry report as submitted, is not sustainable. These writ applications, on this limited question, are allowed and the enquiry report is set aside. The enquiry officer will proceed and inquire into the matter afresh after due intimation to the petitioner about the date fixed in the enquiry. In case the petitioner turns up pursuant to the notice or information and adduces his evidence, the enquiry officer will afford him an opportunity to inspect the record if demanded and shall proceed to enquire into the matter in accordance with law. In case the petitioner defaults even after due information about enquiry, the enquiry officer will inquire into the matter ex parte and submit its report. This exercise, however, must be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. However, liberty is being given to the petitioner to pray for revocation of the order of suspension in case enquiry is not concluded within three months." 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the aforesaid order has not been complied with. 3. The opposite parties have responded to their notice and submitted their show cause. In paragraphs 4, 5 and 6, the following statements have been made. "4. That further to the show cause filed earlier, it is stated that in compliance of the order dated 2.4.2003, the enquiry report was submitted on 9.10.2003 and after considering the enquiry report second show cause was asked for vide letter no. 44 dated 27.1.04 alongwith the copy of the enquiry report. 5. That it is further stated that the petitioner did not file his second show cause, though reminders were also sent to him. 6. That after considering the enquiry report and relevant materials on record the final decision has been taken in the departmental proceeding and communicated vide memo no. 4531 dated 3.5.2006. A photocopy of memo no. 4531 dated 3.5.06 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-B." 4. The copy of the office order dated 3rd of May, 2006 has already been annexed No rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner controverting the aforenoticed facts. 5. We are, thus, satisfied that nothing further needs to be done in this contempt petition. MJC is disposed of accordingly. 6. 4531 dated 3.5.06 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-B." 4. The copy of the office order dated 3rd of May, 2006 has already been annexed No rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner controverting the aforenoticed facts. 5. We are, thus, satisfied that nothing further needs to be done in this contempt petition. MJC is disposed of accordingly. 6. However, it is clarified that this order will not preclude the petitioner in challenging the legality and correctness of the office order dated 3rd of May, 2006, in appropriate proceedings.