Ratan Prabha vs State of Bihar and Others

Narayan Roy, J.—Heard counsel for the parties. However, despite order dated 30th January, 2006, no counter affidavit has been filed.

The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the Inquiry Officer, namely, Sri Baidyanath Prasad, Director-cum-Deputy Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, is the punishing authority of the petitioner in the capacity of Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submitted that Sri Baidyanath Prasad, Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, has become Judge of his own cause. Learned counsel has drawn my attention to annexure 11 showing that Sri Baidyanath Prasad, the then Director, Administration-cum-Deputy Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, was made Inquiry Officer, to enquire into the charges against the petitioner. Learned counsel has also drawn my attention to annexure 17 showing that the petitioner had requested Sri Baidyanath Prasad, the Inquiry Officer, to give her a copy of the inquiry report.

From annexure 1, ex facie, it is manifest that Sri Baidyanath Prasad in the capacity of Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna, has passed the order of punishment ignoring the fact that he was the Inquiry Officer and on his report the departmental action was to be taken. Obviously, therefore, Sri Baidyanath Prasad, who is author of annexure 1, became Judge of his own cause. On these facts alone, this application succeeds and the order impugned, as contained in annexure 1, is set aside.