IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 7233 of 2003 Ram Naresh Prasad Sharma, son of Baccha Singh, resident of Village - Pachaura, P S - Harnaut, District - Nalanda - Petitioner Versus 1) Bihar State Co-Operative Marketing Union through its Managing Director, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna 2) Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna 3) Special Officer (Fertiliser) cum Conducting Officer, BISCOMAUN, Bihar, Patna 4) Special Officer (Vigilance), BISCOMAUN, Patna - Respondents ----------- 6 29.06.2009 The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 08.03.2003 as communicated by the Administrator of BISCOMAUN as contained in Annexure-10 by which he has been terminated. Petitioner had an appellate remedy under the Bihar State Cooperative Marketing Union Staff Regulations to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bihar. The only reason for not preferring the statutory appeal, that was available to the petitioner, is that the departmental proceedings were conducted in violation of principles of natural justice. With reference to Annexures-8 and 9, it is submitted that the Enquiry Officer had ordered for supply of certain documents to the petitioner. In the writ petition, it is stated that those documents were not made available and the Enquiry Officer proceeded. This was clearly the violation of principles of natural justice which vitiated the final order. In the counter affidavit, in reply to the specific averments as contained in paragraphs-20 and 22 of the writ petition, the reply is that the documents which the petitioner had sought were in his custody from before itself. He was aware of those documents and was deliberately not cooperating in the matter. It is 2 2 because of that ultimately the termination order was passed. In my view, these are highly disputed questions of fact which could only be raised before the appellate authority who has the power to interfere both in respect of fact and in law. The petitioner, in such a situation, ought to have resorted to the appellate remedy before coming to this Court. The appellate Court being a Court of facts as well would have settled the issue on facts. It is not proper for this Court to investigate the questions of fact when an equally efficacious alternative remedy is available. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter and entertain this writ petition. Petitioner must first exhaust the statutory appellate remedy that is available to him before coming to this Court. With these observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. It is expected that if an appeal is filed within four weeks from today, the same shall be entertained by the competent authority. Considering the writ petition has been pending in this Court for almost six years, the appellate authority would take the matter and make endeavors to dispose of the same within a period of six months from the day BISCOMAUN appears in the appeal. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)