Ramesh Kr.Datta, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent Bihar School Examination Board.

2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the Office Order dated 28.1.2003 of the Chairman of Bihar School Examination Board by which the petitioner has been dismissed from service and also the Office Order dated 2.5.2003 by which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected and for other consequential relief.

3. The petitioner at the relevant time was working as Assistant in the respondent Board. On 31.3.2000 he was issued a show cause notice charging him for preparing wrong mark-sheet and issuing duplicate certificate of Gopal Prasad of supplementary examination of 1978. Thereafter the petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 13.10.2000 and was served with a memo of charge dated 6.1.2001 directing him to file written statement of defence within 15 days. It is the case of the petitioner that on account of non-supply of papers that he had asked for immediately after service of show cause notice and the charge memo he was unable to file a proper show cause in the matter. Admitted position is that thereafter the Enquiry Officer submitted his enquiry report dated 24.5.2001 holding the petitioner guilty of preparing mark-sheet, without issuing notice to the petitioner to participate in the enquiry proceedings and only on the basis of statement of defence filed by the petitioner and looking into the concerned records. The claim of the petitioner is that he was served with charge memo without any list of witnesses or list of documents on which the respondents intended to rely nor those were supplied to him thereafter. In his enquiry report the Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of having issued mark-sheet to the concerned student despite the concerned page of the original tabulation register being clearly torn and re-pasted and the marks against the concerned student Gopal Prasad appearing to have been erased and re-typed, different from the typing of the marks of the other students on the same page. The petitioner was not found personally guilty of tampering with the mark-sheet and it was held that in view of the procedure for taking out the original tabulation register from the custody of the Secretary of the Board the Section Officer and the concerned Assistant of the record room also appear to be involved. The petitioner was issued a second show cause notice and thereafter by the impugned order dated 28.1.2003 it was held that the petitioner had been found guilty of issuing mark-sheet and of forgery of documents and dismissed from service. Against the order of dismissal the petitioner filed an appeal on 11.3.2003 but the same was also dismissed by the appellate authority by order dated 2.5.2003.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire departmental proceeding is vitiated in law as it has been conducted giving a complete go-bye to the statutory regulation contained in the Service Statute in Chapter-X of the Bihar School Examination Board Regulations. It is urged that Regulations 53 to 55 laying down the procedure for conduct of departmental proceeding have been given a complete go-bye in the matter as the procedure for major punishment as prescribed therein has not been followed. It is sub-mitted that as a matter of fact no enquiry proceeding was held and merely on the issue of charge memo that too without any list of witnesses or list of documents on the show cause reply filed by the petitioner the Enquiry Officer on his own by considering the said show cause and looking into the documents has submitted the enquiry report. At no time the petitioner was called by the Enquiry Officer or given any opportunity of personal hearing before passing of the order of major punishment as required by the Regulations.

5. It is further submitted by learned counsel that despite several requests made by the petitioner to supply the documents the same was not s