Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.—This writ application, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed for following reliefs:—

“1. For quashing of order dated 14.07.2014 passed by the respondent Principal Secretary, communicated to the petitioner, vide Memo No. 3927 dated 16.7.2014 by the Directorate Prison and Correctional Services, contained in Annexure – 1, whereby and whereunder the appeal filed by the petitioner and others has been rejected.

2. For quashing of order of dismissal from service passed by the respondents/Inspector General, vide Memo no. 1335 dated 12.03.2014 as contained in Annexure – 8.

3. For directing the concerned respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service and extend him all consequential benefits thereof.”

2. Brief fact, as stated in the writ application, is that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of ‘Warder’ and was posted in the District Jail, Hajipur. While the petitioner was posted at Mandal Jail, Hajipur, on 11.11.2011, an under-trial prisoner namely Mansoor Khan escaped from the jail, for which, an inquiry was conducted by A.I.G. (Prisons) Bihar, Patna and according to inquiry report dated 19.11.2011 conducted by him, petitioner alongwith three others namely Sri Vishwanath Ram, Sri Jagdish Sharma and Sri Shambhu Nath Das were found prima facie to be responsible for the said lapses and accordingly, a departmental inquiry was recommended against these four persons. Thereafter, vide order dated 21.06.2012, the conducting officer and presenting officer were appointed. The conducting officer submitted his report dated 07.01.2013 to the respondent no. 3/Inspector General stating therein that charges against the petitioner, Vishwa Nath Ram and Shambhu Nath Das were proved, while the charge was not proved against Jagdish Sharma and he was exonerated from the departmental proceeding.

3. Thereafter, 2nd show cause notice dated 05.03.2013 was issued by the concerned respondent to the petitioner and other two persons alongwith inquiry report dated 07.01.2013 and petitioner filed reply to the 2nd show cause pointing out several irregularities and discrepancies in the inquiry report, but the same was not considered by the disciplinary authority and the Inspector General issued order of dismissal from service to the petitioner and other two persons, vide Memo No. 1335 dated 12.03.2014 (Annexure – 8), which was confirmed by the Appellate Authority, vide order dated 14.07.2014 (Annexure – 1). Both orders are under-challenge.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that none of the points, raised by the petitioner, has been considered by the Appellant Authority and in a mechanical manner, without following the due procedure prescribed under Rule 17 & 18 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “C.C.A. Rules, 2005”), he confirmed the order of dismissal.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that besides petitioner, two other persons namely Shambhu Nath Das and Vishwa Nath Ram were also dismissed from the service by the same impugned orders and against the order of appellant authority, one of the delinquent namely Shambhu Nath Dah filed a writ application before this Court, vide C.W.J.C. No. 12103 of 2014 [Reported in 2019 (6) BLJ 508], which was considered by a coordinate Bench of this Court and vide judgment/order dated 08.05.2019, the writ application was allowed and order dated 12.03.2014 passed by Inspector General, Prison and Reforms Service, Government of Bihar, Patna (respondent no. 3) and order dated 14.07.2014 passed by the Appellant Authority / Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar were set-aside and the respondent authority was directed to grant all post retiral dues to the petitioner (Shambhu Nath Das) from the date of his retirement. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of petitioner is exactly similar to the case of said Shambhu Nath Das and as such, si