Patna High Court
Jagat Lal vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 22 April, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8237 of 2016
======================================================
Jagat Lal Son of late Deoki Lal Resident of Village/MOhalla- Gola Road, PS
Danapur, District Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary Registration, Excise Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Commissioner Excise Department, Government of Bihar Patna.
3. The Deputy Secretary Registration Excise and Prohibition Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Collector, Bhagalpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Mishra, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Manini Jaiswal, Advocate
Mr. Ashwini Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Arun Kr. Bhagat, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Nagendra Pd. Yadav (SC-23)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-04-2025
Heard Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and
Learned Counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance
of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned
order dated 14.11.2012 contained in Memo No.5821 (annexed
as Annexure-7) issued under the signature of Deputy Secretary,
Registration Excise and Prohibition Department, Government of
Bihar by which two increments of salary has been stopped
without any departmental proceeding and on a non-existence
ground.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits
Patna High Court CWJC No.8237 of 2016 dt.22-04-2025
2/5
that during pendency of the writ petition, petitioner has retired
from the service on 31.01.2015. Senior Counsel submits that the
order impugned has been passed in gross violation of Rule 19(1)
(d) of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control &
Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'CCA Rules,
2005'). Senior Counsel further submits that the show-cause
about which indication has been made in the order is Letter
No.5551 dated 03.11.2012 (annexed as Annexure-6) is also bad
in law. Senior Counsel submits that the order which has been
passed is completely without recording any finding on
imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour as mentioned in Rule
19(1)(d) of the CCA Rules, 2005. Therefore, the order
impugned is bad in law and fit to be set aside.
4. Learned Counsel for the State on the other hand
submits that the said order is sustainable in the eye of law due to
petitioner's action who has caused revenue loss to the State and
the petitioner has completely failed for monthly
consumption/lifting quota of liquor and therefore, the
department sought an explanation from the concerned district
level officers including the present petitioner and upon his
response which has been found unsatisfactory, the punishment
order has been passed and it is due to this reason, the present
Patna High Court CWJC No.8237 of 2016 dt.22-04-2025
3/5
writ petition is fit to be dismissed.
5. After hearing the arguments of Learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner and Learned Counsel for the State, it
transpires to this Court that the order impugned is basically a
minor punishment and for minor punishment, the procedure
prescribed under Rule 19 of the CCA Rules, 2005 is very much
relevant which states as follows:-
"19. Procedure for imposing minor penalties-
(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (3) of
Rule 18, no order imposing on a Government
Servant any of the penalties specified in
clauses (i) to (v) of Rule 14 shall be made
except after-
(a) informing the Government Servant in
writing of the proposal to take action against
him and of the imputations of misconduct or
misbehaviour on which it is proposed to be
taken, and giving him reasonable opportunity
of making such representation as he may wish
to make against the proposal;
(b) holding an inquiry in the manner laid
down in sub-rules (3) to (23) of Rule 17, in
every case in which the disciplinary authority
is of the opinion that such inquiry is
necessary;
(c) taking the representation, if any, submitted
by the Government Servant under clause (a)
Patna High Court CWJC No.8237 of 2016 dt.22-04-2025
4/5
and the record of inquiry, if any, held under
clause (b) into consideration;
(d) recording a finding on each imputation of
misconduct or misbehaviour; and
(e) consulting the Commission where such
consultation is necessary.
(2) The record of the proceedings in such
cases shall include-
(i) a copy of the intimation to the Government
Servant of the proposal to take action against
him;
(ii) a copy of the statement of imputations of
misconduct or misbehaviour delivered to him;
(iii) his representation if any;
(iv) the evidence produced during the inquiry;
(v) the advice of the Commission, if any;
(vi) the findings of each imputation of
misconduct or misbehaviour; and
(vii) the orders on the case together with the
reasons therefor."
6. It transpires to this Court from the said Letter that
there is neither any proposal to take action against him of the
imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour on which it is
proposed to be taken nor in the final order, finding on
imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour has come. There are
absolute lacking of the ingredients of procedure for imposing
minor penalty in the opinion of this Court and it is due to this
Patna High Court CWJC No.8237 of 2016 dt.22-04-2025
5/5
reason, order dated 14.11.2012 contained in Memo No.5821
(annexed as Annexure-7) as well as Letter No.5551 dated
03.11.2012(annexed as Annexure-6) are hereby set aside.
7. As per the submission made by Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already retired on 31.01.2015, therefore, the Deputy Secretary Registration Excise and Prohibition Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Respondent no.3) is hereby directed to correct the salary and other pensionary benefits of the petitioner as well as his arrears is also directed to be calculated and the Respondent no.3 shall assure the payment after making calculation as if there was no punishment imposed to the petitioner during his service career within 3 months from the date of production of this order before him.
8. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition is hereby allowed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/-
AFR/NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 23/04/2025 Transmission Date NA