BIBEK CHAUDHURI,J. - (1.)The petitioner takes no step. However, on the basis of submission made by the learned Advocate for the respondent, the instant writ petition is taken up for hearing on merit.
(2.)The petitioner has filed the instant application under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging alleged illegal and arbitrary order of dismissal dated 13th July, 1998 from his service as Constable under Border Security Force pursuant to a departmental proceeding.
(3.)It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the respondents that prior to filing of the instant writ petition, the petitioner filed W.P.15136(W) of 1998 against the respondents with the similar relief and a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18th June, 2002 passed the following order as follows :-
"While on Naka duty the writ petitioner was asked by his superior officer to escort the seized bags containing sugar and salt respectively to the prescribed destination. It is alleged that at the reaching point there had been shortage of 10 KG of sugar and 50 KG of salt for which the writ petitioner was proceeded departmentally and was subsequently dismissed from service. At that point of time the writ petitioner was hardly in the second year of his service tenure and was aged about 23 years. On perusal of the evidence it appears that when the bags were loaded on the Matador Van which was directed to be escorted by the delinquent no weighment was done. Hence, it was not logically possible to come to a conclusion that there had been shortage of definite quantity. It had also not come out in the evidence that the seized jute bags were tempared which could prima facie infer that there had been a shortage. It is also alleged that the delinquent made a confession before his superior that while in transit he distributed sugar and salt amongst the villagers. However, the said statement was denied by the petitioner. The appellate authority did not consider the above aspect while affirming the order of punishment.