← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/20441/2010allowed

Ahmad Raza v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-07-30Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20441 of 2010 ====================================================== Ahmad Raza S/o Late Md. Nuruddin at Present Sergant, Police Line, Jehanabad at P.S.-+Distt.- Jehanabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director General Board Bihar through Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna

3. The Director General of Police Bihar, Patna

4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police Champaran Range, Bettiah

5. The Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Md. Najmul Hodda, Advocate Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Arvind Ujjwal, SC-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 30-07-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 09.12.2010 whereby and where under the petitioner has been compulsorily retired with effect from 31.12.2010. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has raised a short point for consideration to the effect that under Rule 14 of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005, compulsory retirement is a major penalty, hence a regular departmental proceeding is required to be conducted in accordance with Rule 17 of the said Rules, 2005. Admittedly, in the present case no regular departmental

Patna High Court CWJC No.20441 of 2010 (4) dt.30-07-2018 2/2 proceeding or enquiry has been held and only upon giving a show cause notice to the petitioner and seeking his reply, the impugned order of compulsory retirement dated 09.12.2010 has been passed which is not permissible in the eyes of law. On the said short point, the order of punishment whereby and where under the petitioner has been compulsorily retired i.e. the one dated 09.12.2010 is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the order dated 09.12.2010 contained in Memo No. 684 is quashed. The writ petition is allowed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U