Patna High Court
Mohan Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 20 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7308 of 2019
======================================================
Mohan Singh Vill.- Bhimalapur, P.o.- Yashodamatt, P.s.- Kanti, Distt.-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary Panchayati Raj Department,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
3. The Divisional Commissioner Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur
4. The Collector cum District Magistrate Muzaffarpur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh
For the Respondent/s : Smt. Archana Meenakshee (GP6)
Mr. Rama Veer Prawar, AC to GP6
Mr. Harish Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 20-08-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-State.
2. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner
seeking following reliefs:
(i) That, for issuance of an
appropriate writ in the nature of
certiorari for quashing the enquiry
report submitted by enquiry officer
on 09.01.2017 and also quashing
memo no. 891 dated 28.04.2017 and
order dated 06.11.2018 issued
under the signature of respondent
nos. 4 and 3 whereby respondent
no. 4 has passed order for dismissal
Patna High Court CWJC No.7308 of 2019 dt.20-08-2025
whereas respondent no.3 has
approved the same, the said orders
are in contravention procedure for
imposing major penalties
contemplated in clause 17 of Bihar
Government Servants
(Classification, Control & Appeal)
Rules, 2005 as well as orders suffer
from several infirmities on facts
and law.
(ii) For issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding and directing the
respondent authorities to reinstate
the petitioner in service with all
consequential monetary benefit.
(iii) For issuance of any other
writ/direction/directions for which
the writ application shall be found
entitled."
3. The facts of the case is that at the relevant time,
the petitioner was posted as Panchayat Secretary. Prapatra 'K'
(Annexure-1) has been issued against him. Along with the
Prapatra 'K', no list of witnesses and list of documents upon
which the department has relied, has been annexed nor supplied
to the petitioner. However, the enquiry officer also without
recording of any the evidence of any of the witness and without
tendering any of the document from the department or the
presenting officer only on the basis of the submission made by
Patna High Court CWJC No.7308 of 2019 dt.20-08-2025
the presenting officer as well as on the basis of reply of the
show cause as submitted by the petitioner arrived at the
conclusion that all the charges levelled against the petitioner are
duly proved. Subsequently, on the basis of the said enquiry
report, the disciplinary authority vide its order dated 28.04.2017
(Annexure-4) passed the order of dismissal of the petitioner. The
said order has been assailed by the petitioner. The appeal
preferred by him has also been rejected by the Divisional
Commissioner vide its order dated 06.11.2018 (Annexure-6) and
hence, this writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
along with the Prapatra 'K' (Annexure-1) no list of witnesses
and list of documents have been prepared and provided to the
petitioner. Therefore, there is a clear cut violation of Rules 13
and 17 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification,
Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005. He further submits that without
recording any statement of the witnesses or without tendering
any of the documents by the department, the enquiry officer
wrongly arrived at the conclusion that all the charges levelled
against the petitioner are duly proved and on the basis of such
type of enquiry report, the disciplinary authority passed the
order of dismissal, which is liable to be set aside.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7308 of 2019 dt.20-08-2025
5. Learned counsel for the respondents-State
opposes the arguments raised by the counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner and submits that as the serious allegation
has been levelled against the petitioner, which has been duly
proved, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief
from the Court.
6. Heard learned counsels appearing for both the
parties and perused the documents annexed with the petition as
well as counter affidavit submitted by the respondents.
7. Perusal of the Prapatra 'K' (Annexure-1) clearly
shows that along with the Prapatra 'K' no list of witnesses and
list of documents have been prepared and provided to the
petitioner. The enquiry report dated 09.01.2017 (Annexure-P/3)
further shows that during course of enquiry, no witness has been
examined by the department nor any document has been
tendered by the department even after that the enquiry officer
arrived at the conclusion that all the five charges, which has
been levelled against the petitioner, are found proved. The
above finding recorded by the enquiry officer is only based
upon the submission of the presenting officer and on the basis of
reply of the show cause submitted by the petitioner. Thus, it is
quite clear that the finding, as recorded by the enquiry officer, is
Patna High Court CWJC No.7308 of 2019 dt.20-08-2025
not based upon any evidence or materials available on record.
Therefore, on this ground alone, the enquiry report as well as
order of dismissal and consequential orders passed by the
Appellate Authority are liable to be set aside.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.
9. The impugned order dated 09.01.2017 (Annexure-
P/3) and the appellate order dated 06.11.2018 (Annexure-P/6)
are hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to reinstate the
services of the petitioner within a period of two months with all
consequential monetary benefits.
(Arvind Singh Chandel , J)
shailendra/-
AFR/NAFR NA
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 21.08.2025
Transmission Date NA
