Harish Kumar, J.—This Court has heard Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, learned Senior Advocate along with Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sharma, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Nadim Seraj, learned Advocate for the State.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved with the resolution of the General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, as contained in Memo No. 6626 dated 01.06.2017, whereby he has been inflicted with the punishment of dismissal from his service with a further direction that he shall not be eligible for future employment in the Government. The petitioner has also assailed the order contained in Memo No. 4334 dated 03.04.2018, whereby the memorial preferred by the petitioner against the dismissal order came to be rejected.

3. The facts as emerging from the materials available on record(s) are summarized hereinbelow:—

(i) The petitioner was a Member of Bihar Administrative Service and while he was posted in the District of East Champaran, Motihari, on the post of Director National Employment Programme (District Rural Development Authority), an FIR was instituted against him by the Economic Office Unit of the Bihar Government bearing E.O.U. P.S. Case No. 31 of 2013 on 17.07.2013 for the offences punishable under Section 13(i)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, for the alleged charges of amassing disproportionate assets to the known sources of income. In course of raid, the property worth Rs.1,27,60,662/- (One crore twenty seven lakh sixty thousand six hundred and sixty two) has been found in excess to the known legal sources of the income of the petitioner. The Inspector General of Economic Offence Unit, upon institution of the FIR, communicated the same to the General Administration Department vide Letter no. 468 dated 18.07.2013 along with the copy of the FIR. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was placed under suspension by the order as contained in Memo No. 12560 dated 29.07.2013. The Government of Bihar, in the Department of General Administration vide its resolution contained in Memo No. 4244 dated 28.03.2014, took a decision to initiate a departmental proceeding against the petitioner under the provisions of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules, 2005’).

(ii) By the letter afore-noted, the Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, was appointed as Conducting Officer whereas a senior officer duly nominated by the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari, as the Presenting Officer. With the afore-noted letter containing the memo of charge (Prapatra-K) was duly served upon the petitioner with a direction to ensure his presence before the Conducting Officer along with his defence. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner appeared before the Conducting Officer and submitted his application with a request to supply the requisite documents in terms of Rule 17(4) of the Rules, 2005 enabling him to tender his effective defence statement.

(iii) Despite the request to make available the requisite documents, when nothing has been done, the petitioner filed reminders. On receipt of the applications/reminders of the petitioner, the Conducting Officer directed the Presenting Officer to supply necessary relevant documents to the petitioner. In pursuance thereto, the Additional Collector, East Champaran, Motihari as well as the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari vide different letters, the copies of which are placed on record as Annexure-5 series, requested the Economic Offence Unite to make available the requisite documents to the petitioner. In the meantime, the suspension of the petitioner revoked by the resolution of the General Administration Department contained in Memo No. 15895 dated 20.11.2016.

(iv) It is the admitted case of the petitioner that despite all his best efforts and the direction given by the Conducting Officer as well as the Presenting Officer to make available the necessary documents, the same could not be supplied to the p