Allowed

Janardan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC15 Jul 2013CWJC/13168/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside punishment orders inflicted on a military constable who sought an inquiry report after the penalty was imposed, holding that natural justice was violated. The case was remanded for a fresh hearing.

What did the court decide?

The impugned orders of punishment were set aside and the matter remanded to the Respondent No. 4 to pass fresh orders after granting the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Janardan Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court CWJC No.13168 of 2013 (2) dt.15-07-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13168 of 2013

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Janardan Yadav S/o Sri Santoshi Yadav R/o Village Ghorahwan, P.O. Madhubani, P.S. Piparasi, Distt. West Champaran at Bettiah

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

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

¶9

Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna

¶10

D.I.G. of Police, Central Zone, Military Police Patna

¶11

Commandant, B.M.P.10, Patna

¶12

.... .... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Hriday Prasad, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Rekha Kumari, AC. To GP-22

¶14

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER

¶15

15.07.2013

¶16

Heard the parties.

¶17

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 9.9.2011 (Annexure-5) passed by the Commandant, Bihar Military Police-10, Patna, inflicting punishment of six months being equivalent to one black mark as also the order of the D.I.G. of Police, Central Zone, Military Police, Patna (Annexure-9) and the order of the D.G.P. Patna (Annexure-11).

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of punishment has been passed illegally and complete violation of natural justice inasmuch as relevant documents such as the inquiry report, statement of constable Nagendra Kumar Manjhi etc. were not made available to the petitioner prior to passing of the order of punishment on 09.09.2011. The petitioner immediately

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.13168 of 2013 (2) dt.15-07-2013

¶20

thereafter on 11.09.2011 filed representation requesting for supply of the relevant documents and it is only after the appeal was filed on 22.10.2011 before the D.I.G. of Police, Central Zone, Military Police that the documents were supplied to the petitioner on 5.11.2011 (Annexure-7).He duly raised objection before the appellate authority with regard to violation of natural justice in terms of paragraph 4(iv) and 7 of his memo of appeal but the same has not been considered, so also the ground raised in the petitioner’s memorial before the D.G.P. did not bear result as the same was held to be not maintainable.

¶21

4. Learned counsel for the State is also unable to show from the orders that the documents had been supplied prior to passing of the order of punishment.

¶22

5. On the other hand, the documents on record clearly show that the impugned order of punishment has been passed on 9.9.2011 whereas on the petitioner’s request the documents including the preliminary inquiry report by Inspector, the copy of finding as well as the statement of constable Nagendra Kumar Manjhi were supplied to the petitioner only thereafter on 05.11.2011. meaning thereby that the punishment has been inflicted without affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner in absence of the documents in question.

¶23

6. In that view of the matter, the impugned orders

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.13168 of 2013 (2) dt.15-07-2013

¶25

are set aside with a direction to the Commandant, B.M.P., Patna (Respondent no.4) to consider the matter afresh and

¶26

pass fresh orders in accordance with law after granting the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter.

¶27

7. The writ petition stands allowed.

¶28

Fahad.

¶29

( Vikash Jain, J. )

Janardan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janardan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jeevan Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dinesh Choudhary Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Manti Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Janma Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Soni Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Minsar Hussain Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.