RANCHI, India, Oct. 25 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Sept. 25:

1) The petitioner had approached the learned writ court for grant of following reliefs:

"(i) This Hon'ble court may be pleased to quash the order passed by the District Education Officer, Dumka contained in memo no. 1547 dated 11.07.2023 (Annexure-1) in so far as merely on oral complaint the petitioner, In-charge Head Master (senior most) has been removed from the post of the In-charge Head Master directing him to hand over the charge to Sri Ravindra Kumar Choudhury and further stopping the petitioners salary for the month of July, 2023. The said order casting stigma on the oral and unverified complaint that the Mid Day Meal is not distributed as per the menu is wholly biased arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of the principle of natural justice and Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India,

(ii) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the order passed by the District Education Officer, Dumka contained in memo no. 1822 dated 05.08.2023 (Annexure-2) in so far as the District Education Officer, Dumka directed payment of the stopped salary for the month of July, 2023, permitting the petitioner to mark attendance on the condition that the petitioner, in future will ensure compliance of departmental orders/directions, which is wholly baseless and unfounded as the petitioner has had an unblemished service tenure and which amounts to casting stigma on the petitioner's clean service career.

(iii) This Hon'ble court may be pleased to quash the order contained in memo no. 2341 dated 06.10.2023 (Annexure-3) passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Dumka (respondent no.5) whereby the petitioner, Assistant Teacher, Middle School Dhouni, Anchal- Saraiyahat, District- Dumka has been suspended by way of penalty casting stigma alleging that the petitioner has issued two School Transfer Certificates to student Harshit Bharti, son of Kundan Bharti by committing forgery which is baseless, malicious, arbitrary in view of the fact that Harshit Bharti had been a bonafide regular student of the said school and had the legal right to obtain a School Transfer Certificate;

(iv) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to set up an enquiry presiding over by a retired District Judge or as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court to ascertain as to whether the second certificate issued to the same student, Harshit Bharti has been forged by the In-charge Head Master, Sri Niranjan Kumar to whom the petitioner handed over the charge on 01.08.2023 on the oral direction of the District Education Officer, Dumka;

(v) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that the impugned order of suspension contained in memo no. 2341 dated 06.10.2023 (Annexure-3) is wholly vague, biased and does not contain facts to constitute any specific charge;

(vi) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to impose heavy cost on the authorities concerned for issuing arbitrary and malicious impugned orders passed in colourable exercise of power and without any legal justification causing acute mental agony to the petitioner,

(vii) Any other relief or reliefs be granted in favour of petitioner as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper."

2) It is not in dispute that while the writ petition was pending, the appellant herein was served with the memo of charges. Not only this, thereafter regular departmental enquiry was conducted leading ultimately to the imposition of penalty of forfeiture of two increments without cumulative effect as evident from the order no. 1367 dated 06.08.2024 that has been placed by the respondent for our perusal.

3) Obviously, in such circumstances, too late in the day for the appellant to question of the show cause notice which has already culminated into an order of penalty.

4) However, it goes without saying that the appellant would have every right to assail the order of penalty as it is the persistent and consistent argument of the appellant that all this exercise undertaken by the respondent was with a malicious intent and purpose.

5) Accordingly the appeal is disposed of.

6) Interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed of.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.