IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13040 of 2009 1. BIRENDRA KUMAR PANDEY S/O LATE RAM DEO PANDEY VILL- RISAWARA, P.S. MAHARAJGANJ, DIST-SIWAN, AT PRESENT ASSISTANT TEACHER, PRIMARY SCHOOL, DAKHIN MATHIYA, P.S. DARAUNDA, DIST-SIWAN----------------PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT. GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR PRIMARY EDUCATION HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT. GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER SARAN DIVISION, CHAPRA 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SIWAN 6. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION SIWAN 7. THE AREA EDUCATION OFFICER SIWAN-----RESPONDENTS ----------- 3 10.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. A very limited submission has been made by learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner with regard to challenge thrown to annexure-9 which is order dated 18.11.2008 passed by Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra. The order in question was passed in Service Appeal No. 214 of2007. The submission of learned Senior Counsel is that when an appeal is filed against the punishment which was imposed upon petitioner on the so called findings of the enquiry officer there is no occasion for the Commissioner to direct the District Magistrate for initiation of fresh proceeding. If the Commissioner is of the opinion that punishment order which was imposed upon the petitioner was not in accordance with the material he could have remanded the matter back pointing out those materials which was required to be looked into or was ignored by the disciplinary authority. But asking for a fresh enquiry was beyond the order and pale of such appeal and to that extent learned counsel is correct that the order cannot be sustained. - 2 - The Court is left with no option, whatever be the stand and the explanation offered by the State in the counter affidavit but to quash annexure-9 dated 18.11.2008 and remit the matter back to the appellate authority to pass an order within the confines of law. This writ application is allowed. Looking at the fact that it is an old matter which is dragging on, the Commissioner would be obliged to decide the matter afresh within a reasonable time frame preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication or production of a copy of this order. Irrespective of the decision in appeal as such since the order of punishment passed by the disciplinary authority does not in any way bar the petitioner from claiming his salary, the concerned respondent will look into the matter, if the salary has not been paid, and steps shall be taken for payment of salary after the date of revocation of the suspension order. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)