SRINIWAS CHANDRA TEWARY v. THE STATE OF BIHAR

Officer against whom the allegation of bias was found prima facie true, after loss of his authority, submits a report. This report of a person accepted to be biased against the petitioner is made the basis of the action. Had it been a case of fresh enquiry where the memo of charge contained independent evidence, the matter would have been different. This Court does not accede to the submission of the State that the petitioner may file his reply to the show cause taking all objections or that it may be permitted to file a counter affidavit. Prima facie, the petitioner has made out a strong case for stay of the departmental proceedings if the authorities are 4 asked to file a counter affidavit. That shall serve no useful purpose as the matter shall remain pending before this Court for a considerable long time since this court is presently hearing writ petitions of the year 2002-2003. The Supreme Court in (1994) 3 SCC 357 (Union of India v.Upendra Singh) in the relevant extract at paragraph 6 has held : “6. In the case of charges framed in a disciplinary inquiry the tribunal or court can interfere only if the charges framed (read with imputation or particulars of the charges, if any) no misconduct or other irregularity alleged can be said to have been made out or the charges framed are contrary to law......” The matter is, therefore, remanded to the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department to examine the matter in accordance with the aforesaid discussion and if he so considers necessary grant personal hearing to the petitioner also and then pass a reasoned and speaking order on the justification for the departmental proceedings and the reasons for his satisfaction that it required no interference at this stage so as to facilitate judicial review. If he is satisfied that the petitioner has a case holding that there was no justification for the departmental proceedings, the administrative aspect of the matter generating the controversy in the facts and circumstances noticed above shall simultaneously have to be considered by him and appropriate action in accordance with law on the administrative side shall be taken against those 5 concerned. In fairness of things and the responsibility of the Respondents to aid in the administration of justice, this Court observes till such the Respondent-Principal Secretary does not pass a fresh reasoned and speaking order, it shall not behove the authorities to continue with the present proceedings. Let such consideration by the Principal Secretary be done and reasoned order passed expeditiously preferably within a period of three months as requested on behalf of the Respondents themselves. terms. The writ application stands disposed in the aforesaid AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)