JUDGMENT :

Ashutosh Kumar, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner, who at the relevant time was posted as Incharge Jail Superintendent, Sitamarhi, has challenged the order dated 09.11.2017 issued by the General Administration Department, contained in memo no. 4196, whereby the petitioner has been awarded the punishment of censure and stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect as also for challenging the order dated 29.08.2018, contained in Memo No. 11623, whereby the review application of the petitioner has been rejected and the order of the disciplinary authority imposing punishment upon him has been affirmed and upheld.

3. The petitioner has prima facie challenged the aforesaid orders on the ground that the major punishment was awarded to him and his review petition was rejected without the charges being proved against him. The further ground of challenge is that the entire departmental proceeding is based on an enquiry report submitted by the SDO and SDPO, Sitamarhi, who had conducted an inspection of Sitamarhi jail behind the back of the petitioner and they were not presented before the disciplinary authority for proving their report or for the pet