IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3432 of 2002 Asheshwar Mishra, S/O Late Sonalal Mishra at and P.O. Jagadishpur Boghanagari District- Muzaffarpur, at present retired teacher from Govt.Basic School, Boghanagari, District- Muzaffarpur …… Petitioner Versus 1.Lokayukta Bihar, Patna, through its Secretary, 2,Kautilya Marg, Patna 2.The State of Bihar through its Secretary- cum-Commissioner, Primary, Secondary and Adult Education, Bihar, Patna 3.Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna 4.R.D.D.E. Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur 5.DEO, Muzaffarpur 6.Headmaster, Rajkiya Basic School, Boghnagari, Muzaffarpur ……. Respondents ----------- 3. 11/08/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. In this writ application petitioner has prayed for quashing of the communication contained in Annexure-6 made by the District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur to the petitioner requiring him to deposit an amount of Rs.9,119.97p on the ground of irregular withdrawal with an warning that failing deposit of the same, certificate case shall be instituted against him. The said Annexure-6 appears to have been passed on communication of the respondent Director, Primary Education to the District Education Officer vide Annexure-7. There is nothing on record to show as to - 2 - under what circumstances petitioner has been asked to deposit the said amount. From the two Annexures, it appears that there had been some orders in respect of some allegations against the then District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur passed under section 10(5) of Lokayukt Act, 1973. From Annexures-10 and 11, it appears that the petitioner filed a petition before the Lokayukt as well as before the Headmaster of the school to the effect that he had no knowledge of any proceeding before the Lokayukt nor has he got any details as to in what manner petitioner has been held liable to deposit the said excess withdrawal by the then District Education Officer. This case was taken up on 21.3.2002 and was ordered to be listed in due course. However, in the meanwhile, recovery of the said amount in terms of the order of Respondent Director, Primary Education, as contained in Annexure-7, was stayed. Even after passage of seven years, no counter affidavit has been filed in the case. From the documents annexed with the writ application and from Annexures-6 and 7 it does - 3 - not appear that the petitioner was ever noticed to show cause as to why said amount may not be recovered from him. It is also clear that the petitioner had no knowledge as to in what manner he was held liable for payment of the said amount. Thus, it appears that the orders, as contained in Annexures-6 and 7 passed against the petitioner are in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. In the circumstances, in absence of any counter affidavit or any contrary stand on record by the respondents, the orders, as contained in Annexures-6 and 7 cannot stand. Accordingly, both the orders are quashed. Since the petitioner has superannuated long back and he is being asked to deposit the amount at the fag end of his life, no liberty is granted to the respondents to proceed afresh in the matter. In the result, this writ application is allowed. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh, J.)