IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8992 of 2020

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

Mithilesh Kumar Son of Late Ayodhya Prasad Gupta Resident of Mohalla-

Mahajan Toli, Near Sukha Rouza, Ward No. 17, Sasaram, P.S.- Sasaram

Town, Distt.- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, General Administration

Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate Rohtas at Sasaram.

3.

The Dy. Collector, Establishment, Rohtas, Sasaram.

4.

The SDO, Sasaram.

5.

The BDO, Bikramganj, Rohtas.

6.

The District Supply Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram.

7.

The Addl. Collector, Rohtas, Sasaram.

8.

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Rohtas, Sasaram.

... ... Respondent/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr.Dineshwar Mishra, Advocate

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr. Suman Kumar Jha (AC to AAG-3)

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI

ORAL ORDER

5

14-12-2021

Heard learned counsels for respective parties.

In the instant petition petitioner has prayed for

following reliefs:

That this is an application for issuance of

appropriate writ (s), order (s) or direction

commanding the respondents for making

payment of arrears of salary of suspension period

i.e. from July, 2013 to August, 2015 and for

quashing of the order No.39/19-20 issued vide

Memo No. 673 dated 21.10.2019 passed by the

Respondent No. 2 contained in Annexure-7, as

the aforesaid order appears to be illegal without

assigning any reason for passing order contrary

to the Joint enquiry report as such the order dated

21.10.2019 is fit to be set aside and the act of the

Respondents no. 2 is high handed, unjust and

Patna High Court CWJC No.8992 of 2020(5) dt.14-12-2021

2/6

arbitrary in nature and the same has infringed the

fundamental right of the petitioner conferred

under article 21 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner was subjected to disciplinary proceeding

in framing of charge on 04.10.2013 and it was concluded in

imposition of penalty of withholding of increment vide order

dated 19.10.2019. In the meanwhile, petitioner has attained the

age of superannuation and retired from service on 31.12.2018.

Penalty order reads as under:-

lekgj.kky;] jksgrkl ¼lklkjke½

¼LFkkiuk “kk[kk½

vkns”k la0 39@19&20

v/;{k ftyk miHkksDrk Qksje] jksgrkl lklkjke ds i=kad 03 eks0]

fnukad 08-05-2013 }kjk Jh fefFkys”k dqekj xqIrk@fefFkys”k dqekj] fyfid]

izfrfu;qDr ftyk miHkksDrk Qksje] jksgrkl }kjk vkns”k dh vogsyuk ,oa

vuq”kklughurk ds vkjksi ij izkIr Li’Vhdj.k ij v/;{k] ftyk miHkksDrk Qksje]

jksgrkl] lklkjke ls izkIr earO; ds vkyksd esa bl dk;kZy; ds vkns”k la0

58@13&14 lalwfpr Kkikad 740@LFkk0 fnukad 18-07-2013 }kjk bUgsa fuyafcr

fd;k x;k rFkk bl dk;kZy; ds vkns”k la0 87@13&14 lalwfpr Kkikad

1001@LFkk0 fnukad 04-10-2013 }kjk Jh dqekj fyfid] ftyk lkekU; “kk[kk]

jksgrkl izfrfu;qDr ftyk miHkksDrk Qksje] jksgrkl lklkjke ds fo:) izi= ^d*

esa xfBr vkjksi i= ij foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh lapkyu ds fufer Jh jke”kadj flag]

vij lekgrkZ] foHkkxh;m tkWap] jksgrkl dks lapkyu inkf/kdkjh ukfer fd;k

x;kA lapkyu inkf?kdkjh&lg&vij lekgrkZ] foHkkxh; tkWap] jksgrkl] lklkjke

ds i=kad 94 @foHkkxh

; tkWap] fnukad 09-05-2014 foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh okn la0

12@2013 esa vkjksi ds dzekad 01 ,oa 02m iw.kZr% izekf.kr fd;k x;k gSA

Patna High Court CWJC No.8992 of 2020(5) dt.14-12-2021

3/6

rn~uqlkj lapkyu inkf/kdkjh ds earO; ds vkyksd esa f}rh; dkj.ki`PNk ij Jh

dqekj] fyfid }kjk vius izFke dkj.ki`PNk ds ckrksa dks iqu% nksgjk;k x;k gSA

ftlij rRdkyhu viu lekgrkZ] ¼jktLo½ jksgrkl ls tkWap izfrosnu dh ekWax dh

xbZA

Jh dqekj] fyfid ftyk lkekU; “kk[kk] jksgrkl izfrfu;qDr ftyk

miHkksDrk Qksje] jksgrkl] lklkjke ds fo:) lapkfyr foHkkxh; esa izkIr lapkyu

inkf/kdkjh dk earO; rFkk rRdkh