##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3195 of 2025

======================================================

Girjanandan Sharma Son of Late Jagdish Sharma, Resident of Village-

Kamtachak, P.O- Mittanchak, P.S.- Gopalpur, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Home Department

Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. Additional Director General of Police, Bihar Special Armed Police, Bihar,

Patna.

4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bihar Special Armed Police (North

Division), Muzaffarpur.

5. Inquiry Officer-cum-Deputy Superintendent of Police- cum- Commandant,

C Company, Bihar Special Armed Police, XII, Bhim Nagar, Supaul (Bihar).

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Giri, Sr. Advocate

Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Advocate

Mr. Harsh Raj, Advocate

Mr. Chetan Anand, Advocate

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (6)

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI

ORAL ORDER

3 29-01-2026 The petitioner is a retired Assistant Sub-Inspector of

Police. His service came to an end on superannuation w.e.f. 31^st

January, 2019. While he was in service, he was arrested by a

raid party with the allegation of consumption of prohibited

alcohol within the jurisdiction of the police station where he was

posted. After such arrest on 23^rd July, 2018, Excise Case No. C

I-477/2018 under Section 37(B) of the Excise and Prohibition

Act, 2016 was registered against the petitioner. The petitioner

was arrested and taken to custody.

2. The above-mentioned act being treated as

Patna High Court CWJC No.3195 of 2025(3) dt.29-01-2026

2/5

professional misconduct. A departmental proceeding was

initiated against the petitioner. The Commandant of Bihar

Armed Police, Saharsa submitted Memorandum of Charge

against the petitioner and on conclusion of departmental

proceeding, he was dismissed from service six days before his

superannuation on 25^th January, 2019.

3. The petitioner preferred a departmental appeal

which was subsequently allowed and the Inquiry Authority was

directed to give opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine

the witnesses on behalf of the prosecution. As the petitioner had

retired from service in the meantime, the departmental

proceeding was converted to a proceeding under Section 43(B)

of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. In the said inquiry

proceeding, the petitioner was found committing gross

misconduct and 20 per cent of his pension was directed to be

deducted for five years. It was further directed that he would not

be paid balance salary except the suspension allowance during

the period suspension. The petitioner challenged the said order

dated 27^th June, 2023 in an appeal which was dismissed by the

appellate authority. Hence, the instant writ petition.

4. The learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the

petitioner has assailed the decision of the penalty of inquiry

Patna High Court CWJC No.3195 of 2025(3) dt.29-01-2026

3/5

authority, subsequently affirmed by the appellate authority on

the ground that the punishment of deduction of 20 per cent of

pension amount for five years and direction of non-payment of

salary beyond the suspension allowance are disproportionate to

the alleged misconduct because even assuming that the

petitioner consumed prohibited liquor, it may be an instance of

moral turpitude but such act of the petitioner did not cause any

pecuniary loss to the police department. Therefore, recovery of

money from the pension of the petitioner is arbitrary and

disproportionate to the charge leveled against him.

5. Secondly, it is contended by the learned Advocate

on behalf of the petitioner that the departmental inquiry against

the petitioner is itself bad in law because Rule 17(3) of the Bihar

Government Servants (Classification Control and Appeal)

Rules, 2005 lays down a mandatory prov