Allowed

Sushil Jha v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 May 2023CWJC/1074/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Patna allowed a writ petition regarding pending departmental proceedings against a retired petitioner. The court directed the disciplinary authority to conclude the proceedings within three months and noted the Memo No. 272 was unwarranted pre-decisional.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pass final order in disciplinary proceeding within three months; Memo No. 272 dated 17.06.2020 held unwarranted. Writ petition allowed.

Sushil Jha Vs The State of Bihar — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1074 of 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Sushil Jha Son of Late Jai BHadra Jha Resident of Village-Nazirpur, Police Station-Rahika, District-Madhubani.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary Department of Finance, Govt. of Bihar, Bihar.

¶7

The District Magistrate, District Samastipur.

¶8

The Block Development Officer, Hasanpur, Samastipur.

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Soban Asghar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nawal Kishor Singh, AC to GP-26 ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 03-05-2023 Heard Mr. Md. Soban Asghar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Nawal Kishor Singh, learned AC to learned GP-26 for the State.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present writ petition in view of Memo No. 272 dated 17.06.2020 in which, the District Magistrate, Samastipur has passed an order that a departmental proceeding is pending against the petitioner and without there being any order of recovery, the total amount of Rs. 8,09,082/is liable to be recovered along with 12% interest.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the order contained in Memo No. 272 dated 17.06.2020 is pre-decisional in nature and any

¶15

Patna High Court CWJC No.1074 of 2023(2) dt.03-05-2023 2/2

¶16

departmental proceeding, which is pending against the petitioner will prejudice the right of the petitioner.

¶17

Considering the admitted position that the departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner for recovery of Rs. 8,09,082/- along with 12% interest is still pending and the order passed by the District Magistrate, Samastipur contained in Memo No. 272 dated 17.06.2020 is unwarranted, the disciplinary authority is directed to pass final order taking into consideration that the alleged defalcation is of year 2006-2011 and the petitioner had retired in the year 2014 and the disciplinary proceeding is pending since then.

¶18

Disciplinary proceeding is directed to be concluded

¶19

within a period of three months.

¶20

Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed.

¶21

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶22

Niraj/-

¶23

Sushil Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Jha v. The State of Bihar

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

Tajbar Tabbasum Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Devendra Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Shiv Shanker Gupta Vs The State of Bihar

Braj Nandan Singh Vs The Veer Kuer Singh University, Ara

Arun Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Savitri Devi Vs The Bihar State Road Transport Corporation