Bibek Chaudhuri, J. – The petitioner has invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for following reliefs: –

“(i) For setting aside the order dated 10.12.2019 passed by the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna upholding order of Termination contained in Memo No. 119 dt. 29.01.2019 passed by Respondent No.3, District Magistrate, District- Patna, Bihar and further to quash the order of Termination contained in Memo No. 119 dt. 29.01.2019 as well.

(ii) For directing the respondents to Reinstate the petitioner to his position of GRAMIN AAWAS SAHAYAK under the Bihar Rural Development Society, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna as has been allowed to several other persons alike to the petitioner by the concerned Respondents in similarly situated matters of the same cadre and category.

(iii) To direct Respondents for the Payment of all back-due salaries along with consequential benefits to the petitioner from the date of his wrongful dismissal until his reinstatement.

(iv) For directing Respondents to pay the ex-gratia compensation for the mental and financial agony suffered due to the arbitrary termination.

(v) For directing the Respondents to pay all consequential benefits, including but not limited to, seniority, promotions, and any other benefits accrued during the period of wrongful termination.

(vi) To grant any other relief/s for which the petitioner be found entitled in the eye of the law.”

2. The petitioner was appointed to the post of Gramin Awas Sahayak vide Memo No. 793, dated 3rd of March, 2014 under the Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. When he was posted in the office of Block Development Officer, Danapur, he received a notice to show cause as to why first installment of aid money to the beneficiaries for the financial year 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (Gramin) (“PMAY” for brevity) was not issued and disbursed to the beneficiaries.

3. It is pertinent to note that as Gramin Awas Sahayak, the petitioner enjoined with the duty of disbursement of fund to the beneficiaries for construction of houses under PMAY. The petitioner duly replied to the said show-cause notice, stating, inter alia, that he disbursed the first installment of grant of PMAY. However, he did not include the names of some persons who were declared as beneficiaries for registration because they did not have even land to construct houses under the said Scheme. The petitioner was served with second showcause notice on 22nd of September, 2018. He also submitted his reply to the satisfaction of his authorities. Subsequently, he was served with third show-cause notice by the Respondent No. 5 vide Memo No. 1440, dated 13th of October, 2018. It was alleged that the petitioner transferred fund granted in the name of a particular beneficiary to the account of other beneficiaries. The petitioner pleaded his inadvertence and rectified such error immediately.

4. The Respondent No. 5, Block Development Officer, Danapur, Patna sought for an explanation of the petitioner as to why he was absent in the meeting dated 22nd October, 2018. He immediately replied that due to physical illness, he could not attend office on 22nd of October, 2018.

5. On 25th of October, 2018, the State Gramin Awas Staff Association, Bihar (“SGASA” for short) called for a statewide strike, mass leave and dharna in the District Collectorate against the punitive action(s), deductions of honorarium and for other demands. Therefore, the petitioner, being a member of SGASA, did not attend his duty from 25th of October, 2018 to 6th of November, 2019. He joined his service on 6th of November, 2019. On 12th of December, 2018, he was served with a chargesheet, issued by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Danapur, Patna (Respondent No. 4) for unauthorized absence during the said period. The petitioner submitted his reply to the ch