2025:JHHC:34175 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) 217 of 2020 Smt. Manju Kumari, aged about 57 years, wife of Shri Shashi Bhushan Prasad, resident of New Sahdeo Nagar, P.O.-Hehal, P.S.-Sukhdeo Nagar (O.P.-Pandra), District- Ranchi. .… Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, through its Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District- Ranchi: 2. Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department of the Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi; 3. Special Secretary, Food, Public Distribution & Consumer Affairs Department, of the Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District- Ranchi ..... Respondents --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Sahani, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. ….AC to (L&C)-I --------- 11/Dated: 06.11.2025 The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for following reliefs:- 1. For issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ(s)/Order(s) for quashing the impugned Office Order issued under Memo No: 3354 dated 26.11.2019 (Annexure-10) whereby and whereunder the respondent No:3 imposed a punishment of withholding of two (2) annual increments with cumulative effect and Censor: II. For issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate direction commanding upon the respondents to pay arrear salary for the period from 28.09.2010 to 04.12.2013 i.e. the period of suspension within a specified period. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, amongst 2025:JHHC:34175 2 other grounds, has strenuously contended that the inquiry report was not provided to him and for which he has been seriously prejudiced. He further draws attention of this court towards to the order impugned and submits that the same is non-speaking and non-reasoned order, inasmuch as, the grounds of not receiving the inquiry report and the ground of in absentia inquiry has not been deliberated, rather an order has been passed without giving any reason. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents tries to justify the impugned order and refers several paragraphs of the counter affidavit. However, the fact remains that any impugned order can't be improvised by way of an affidavit. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, and after going through the impugned order, it appears that the same contains no reason whatsoever. The only reason which is indicated in the impugned order of punishment is that the concerned officer has gone through the inquiry report and the reply of second show cause notice and passed the impugned order. For brevity the same is extracted here-in-below:- “उपायु्ሹ, रााँची के पत्ाांक 353 (ii) / अनु० दिनाांक 28.08.2018 ्ቛारा ्ቦीमती मांजू कु मारी, त्ሹालीन आपूदति दनरी्ቌक, कॉके स቗ኚरदत रख्ቄ आपूदति पिादिकारी रामगढ़ के दिरू्ቍ रदतिेदित आरोपो के दलए ्ቦीमती कु मारी के दिरु्ቍ दिभागीय कारििाई सांचादलत की गयी। सांचालन पिादिकारी से रा्቎ जााँच रदतिेिन में ्ቦीनती मांजू कु मारी के दिरू्ቍ लगाये गये आरोप गांभीर रकृ दत के एिां आचार दनयमािली के दिरू्ቍ पाये गये तथा ि्ቄ अदिरोपण की अनुशांसा की गयी है। 2025:JHHC:34175 3 जॉच रदतिेिन एिां द्ቛतीय कारण पृ्ስा के आलोक में रा्቎ उ्ቈर की समी्ቌा के उपराांत ्ቦीमती मांजू कु मारी के दिरू्ቍ दन्ቖदलखखत िांड के अ्ቖारोपण का दनणिय दलया गया है। (i) सांचयी रभाि से िो िेतन िृख्ቍ पर रोक, एिां (ii) भदि्ቦ के दलए चेतािनी िांड अदिरोदपत करते हुए ्ቦीमती कु मारी के दिरू्ቍ दिभागीय कायििाही समा्቎ करने का दनणिय दलया जाता है।“ 5. From the reply to the second show cause notice which is at annexure-9-page-75, it appears that there is a specific contention of the petitioner that no inquiry was held in his presence. Secondly, no evidence has been adduced by the department to support the allegation and the third contention was that no inquiry report was served upon him along with the second cause notice; but for the reason best known to the Disciplinary authority, none of these grounds has been deliberated. 6. Accordingly, this Court is having no hesitation in holding that the impugned order dated 26-11-2019 (Annexure-10 to the writ application) is non-reasoned and non-speaking order and the same is hereby quashed and set aside. 7. It has been informed that the Petitioner has retired on 30th June 2023, as such, the concerned Respondent is directed to pass a fresh order after serving the copy of the entire enquiry report to the Petitioner, but the entire exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order; failing which it would be deemed that the department does not want to proceed in the matter, 2025:JHHC:34175 4 and in that case, all consequential benefits which will accrue pursuant to quashment of the aforesaid order and it shall be paid to the petitioner within a further period of six weeks. 8. Accordingly, the instant writ application is hereby allowed. I.As, if any, is also closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) November 06, 2025 Fahim/ Uploaded on 21/11/2025