JUDGMENT :

ANSHUMAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking relief setting aside the order dated 05.01.2022 passed by the Appellate Authority and the Revisional Tribunal-cum-Hon’ble Minister, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Annexure -P/1), whereby the review petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected. A further prayer has been made for setting aside the order of dismissal dated 07.09.2015, issued vide Memo No. 1041 (Annexure-P/2), by which the petitioner was dismissed from service under the provisions of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules of 2005”). The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the Memo of Charge contained in Memo No. 185 dated 25.04.2014 (Annexure- P/3), on the ground that the same was issued in gross violation of the Bihar Framing of Charge-Sheets against Government Servants Regulations, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as the “Regulations of 2011”). Further, the petitioner has prayed for reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits, including payment of arrears of salary and other admissible dues, to which the petitioner would be entitled upon setting aside of the aforesaid impugned orders.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed to the post of Assistant Consolidation Officer on the recommendation of the then Bihar Subordinate Services Selection Board, and subsequently, during the course of his service, he was promoted to the post of Circle Officer. While the petitioner was posted as Circle Officer, Manpur, Gaya, a criminal case, namely Vigilance P.S. Case No. 66 of 2013 dated 08.10.2013, was registered against him under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, on the allegation of having accepted a bribe of Rs. 5,000/- from one Anup Lal Mehta. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner was arrested in the said case and was placed under suspension vide order dated 05.12.2013, as contained in Memo No. 976, with effect from 08.10.2013. Thereafter, the petitioner was granted bail vide order dated 24.01.2014 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3324 of 2014. Upon his release from custody, the petitioner’s suspension was revoked with effect from 29.01.2014. However, since the petitioner was allegedly caught red-handed while accepting a bribe of Rs. 5,000/-, he was again placed under suspension vide order dated 05.03.2014, as contained in Memo No. 94, issued by the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Annexure- P/7 to the writ petition). Thereafter, the Under Secretary to the Government issued a letter bearing Letter No. 185 dated 25.04.2014, along with Prapatra-‘K’, calling upon the petitioner to submit his show-cause reply within 15 days in respect of the three charges mentioned therein.

4. Learned counsel further submits that the said Prapatra-‘K’, which is in the nature of a Memo of Charge, is wholly defective and not in conformity with the Regulation of 2011. It is further submitted that the petitioner submitted his defence, categorically denying all the allegations levelled against him. The petitioner also appeared before the Enquiry Officer, who, upon conclusion of the enquiry, found the first and third charges partially proved, while the second charge was held to be fully proved.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that a second show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner, whereby he was called upon to submit his response with respect to the enquiry report. Thereafter, an order of punishment was imposed upon the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that, being aggrieved by the said order of punishment, the petitioner approached this Hon’ble Court; however, the writ petition was disposed off with liberty to