ORDER
Amareshwar Sahay, J.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner who was working as
Extra-clerk in the District Registration office at Hazaribagh has been terminated
from his service by issue of Annexure-4 i.e.,
the order dated 15.05.1997. by the District
Registrar-cum-Deputy Commissioner,
Hazaribagh on the ground that the petitioner
and two others made some interpolation in
the Registry Book No. 1 at Pages-559-563
of Deed No. 9146 of the year 1984. The
appeal filed by the petitioner against the said
order of termination was also dismissed by
order as contained in Annexure-8 dated 10.8.2001 by the Inspector General of Registration. The petitioner has sought to challenge these two orders mainly on the ground that after submission of his show cause, neither any fresh notice to show cause was issued to him nor any enquiry was held and therefore, the action of the respondents of terminating the service of the petitioner was bad in law.
3. The petitioner moved this Court earlier in CWJC No. 4579 of 1999 (R), challenging the order of his termination dated 15.5.1997 but as it appears from An-nexure-6 i.e., the order dated 23.1.2000 that the said writ application was dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioner to exhaust the alternative remedy of the departmental appeal. Thereafter the petitioner filed appeal before the Inspector General of Registration, which has been dismissed by a reasoned order dated 29.8.2001 i.e., Annexure-8.
4. It was found that the certified copy was prepared by one Madhav Chandra Banerjee, Extra-clerk and the same was read and compared by the petitioner and one Amanat Hussain. Madhav Chandra Banerjee in his show cause admitted that he received a bribe of Rs. 200/- from Pradip Mahto, who had applied for the certified copy of the document. It was further found that the copyist, comparer and reader were directly involved in the alleged interpolation.
5. Therefore, from the facts of the case It appears that enquiry was made, into the matter, show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and others and then after consideration of the same, impugned orders were passed.
6. From the appellate order, it further appears that the appellate Court noticed the fact that the District Sub-Registrar-cum-Additional Collector, Hazaribagh, had made enquiry into the matter and it was found that the petitioner and two other Extra- clerks were actively involved in making interpolation in the aforesaid document. The appellate Court after considering the entire materials on record as well as the causes shown by ,the petitioner held that the said act of interpolation was done after taking illegal gratification and, therefore, considering the gravity of the charges against the petitioner and others held that the order for terminating the Service passed by the District Registrar-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh was absolutely justified.
7. Considering the respective submissions of the parties and on consideration of the entire fact, I do not find any reason to Interfere with the impugned orders. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.