Jayanandan Singh, J.

1. Shorn of all the adjectives, comments and imputations of mala fide against respondent no.6, the then Chairman of the Staff Selection Commission, Patna (for short #30;the Commission?), facts of the case as appearing from the pleadings of the petitioner is that, after his initial appointment as Deputy Collector in the year 1978 under the Government, in due course of posting, petitioner was posted as Secretary of the Commission through Notification dated 26.03.2006, pursuant to which he joined on 01.09.2006. On 18.09.2006 there was some incident in the chamber of the Chairman of misbehavior on the part of the petitioner. Accordingly, the same day, he received a letter (Annexure-1) from the Chairman, asking him to show cause in respect of his conduct in his chamber. Petitioner submitted his explanation on 21.09.2006 (Annexure-2) to the said notice. However, the Chairman framed charges and, by letter dated 22.09.2006 (Annexure-3), addressed to the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, requested for initiation of a departmental proceeding against him enclosing the charges and also requested for his transfer somewhere else. Subsequently, the Chairman framed supplementary charges and communicated the same also to the Secretary of the Department through his letter dated 09.10.2006 (Annexure-4). Petitioner, apprehending a proceeding, proceeded on leave and thereafter he was transferred and posted as Deputy Secretary in the Urban Development Department, vide Notification dated 27.10.2006. Accordingly, he relinquished his charge in the Commission on 31.10.2006 and assumed charge of Deputy Secretary in the Urban Development Department.

2. Subsequently petitioner was issued a notice by the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department through letter dated 07.12.2006 (Annexure-5), enclosing a copy of the charges and supplementary charges, asking him to show cause in respect of the same. Accordingly, he filed his reply to the same through his letter dated 29.12.2006 (Annexure-6). However, by Resolution dated 19.04.2007 (Annexure- 7), a proceeding was initiated against him in terms of Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as #30;the Rules?) and the Departmental Enquiry Commissioner was assigned to conduct the enquiry against him and Section Officer of the Department was appointed as Presenting Officer. Petitioner appeared before the Departmental Enquiry Commissioner and, through his letter dated 02.05.2007 (Annexure-8), requested for supply of 8 documents. In view of the said request of the petitioner, through letter dated 22.06.2007 (Annexure-9), Chairman of the Commission was asked to furnish the copies of the documents. Accordingly, through letter dated 10.07.2007 (Annexure-10), two documents were supplied to the petitioner and it was offered that he could visit the office of the Commission and peruse the rest of the documents. It was mentioned in the said letter, which was signed by the Secretary of the Commission and was addressed to the petitioner, that on that very day a representative of the Commission had appeared before the Departmental Enquiry Commissioner along with the documents and files and it was said that although petitioner was present on that day, but he did not peruse the documents. Petitioner, later on, on 09.09.2008 filed a protest (Annexure-11) before the Departmental Enquiry Commissioner in respect of non-supply of the documents by the Commission. It is contended that, though the Departmental Enquiry Commissioner was asked to conclude the enquiry within two months and, by referring to Annexure-12 and 13, it is contended that though the enquiry was required to be concluded within 12 months, the same continued for 18 months and, finally by Resolution of the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 12.03.2009 (Annexure-14), petitioner was inflicted with punishment of censor for the period 2