Patna High Court
Anand Mohan Prasad Sinha vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 6 August, 2018
Author: Madhuresh Prasad
Bench: Madhuresh Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3453 of 2015
===========================================================
Anand Mohan Prasad Sinha, Son of Late Shiv Nandan Prasad Sinha, resident of
Village + Post Office- Deri, Police Station- Akbarpur, District- Nawada at present
Mohala- Ghughri tar, Bodh Gaya Road, Madhusudan Colony, Road No. 02, Police
Station- Civil Lines, District- gaya.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Forest Conservator, Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Forest Officer, Munger Division, Munger Forest Office, Kila
Bhawan, Munger.
4. The Forest Officer, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur.
5. The Forest Conservation Officer, Wild Life Circle, Patna, K-3, Block Officers
Flat, New Punaichak, Patna- 23.
.... .... Respondents
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Archana Minakshi, GP 6 and
Mr. Karnandeep Kumar, Advocate
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 06-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the appeal filed by the petitioner has been disposed of by a cryptic order dated 7.6.2014 (Annexure 12) issued by the Forest Conservator, Wildlife Circle, Patna being the Appellate Authority.
3. This Court would find that the order passed by the Appellate Authority does not show consideration of the various issued raised by the petitioner.
Relevant extract of the order is reproduced herein Patna High Court CWJC No.3453 of 2015 dt.06-08-2018 2/4 below:-
"vkids }kjk lefiZr vihy vH;kosnu esa fdlh u;s rF; dk mYys[k ugha fd;k x;k gSA bl rF;ksa ds vkyksd esas vkidk vihy vH;kosnu vLohdkj djrs gq, fu'ikfnr fd;k tkrk gSA"
4. Order issued by the Appellate Authority is glaring example of a non speaking order. The same shows total non application of mind and a very casual approach. The same is without assigning any reason and cannot be said to be in consideration of the points raised in elaborate appeal.
5. Appeal was the first and the only opportunity availed to the petitioner to highlight the infirmities in the departmental proceedings. The Appellate Authority should have considered all the pleas raised by him in his appeal. The importance of assigning reasons has been emphasized repeatedly by this Court. Assigning reasons is essential to avoid arbitrariness and to minimize the scope of any injustice being caused. Reliance has been placed on a judgment in case of Hasan Muzahid Vs. The Bihar State Electricity Board and others, reported in case of 2015(4) PLJR (HC) 435. In such a case where the Appellate authority has assigned no reason while rejecting the points raised by the petitioner in the appeal, the remedy of appeal provided under the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005 becomes an empty formality. Time and Patna High Court CWJC No.3453 of 2015 dt.06-08-2018 3/4 again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that such exercise is illegal.
6. Appellate order dated 7.6.2014, issued by respondent no.5 rejecting petitioner's appeal against order of punishment dated 9.11.2004 (Annexure 8) is, therefore, unsustainable in law and is quashed. As a result of quashing of the said order, respondent no.5 would be obliged to take decision afresh after dealing with the petitioner's appeal in accordance with law and procedure prescribed under Rule 27 and other relevant provisions of the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005. The petitioner would approach the Appellate authority (respondent no.5) with a copy of this order for fresh consideration within a period of four weeks. Appellate authority would be obliged to consider and dispose of his appeal by a reasoned and speaking order after affording due opportunity to the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks thereafter.
7. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.
8. Petitioner also complains that he has not been paid subsistence allowance during the departmental proceedings.
9. The petitioner may make his claim for the subsistence allowance within the aforesaid period. It is expected Patna High Court CWJC No.3453 of 2015 dt.06-08-2018 4/4 that while disposing of the appeal of the petitioner, the Appellate Authority will also examine petitioner's claim of admissibility of subsistence allowance.
10. The writ petition is allowed.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) Shashi.
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 13.8.2018 Transmission NA Date