IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1679 of 2004 LALAN SINGH son of late Dharikshan Singh, resident of Mohalla Nawada, P.O. Arrah, P.S. Nawadah Ara, Dist.- Bhojpur ………..Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The District Officer, Ara, Bhojpur. 3. The District Education Superintendent Ara, Bhojpur. 4. The Regional Education Officer, Udwant Nagar Ara, Bhojpur. ………….Respondents. ----------- 3. 29.10.2010 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State as also taking into account the impugned order of punishment dated 03.04.2003 which has been passed even without notice and giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner after he had stood exonerated in the inquiry report of the Inquiry Officer dated 10.03.2003, by itself will be sufficient to quash the order of punishment dated 03.04.2003 contained in Annexure-4. Law in this regard stands very well settled that if the Inquiry Officer would exonerate the delinquent, the disciplinary authority can still pass order of punishment but before doing so he must give a notice recording the difference of opinion. Admittedly such recourse was not adopted in the present case as has been laid down by the Apex court in the case of Punjab National Bank & ors. Vs. Kunj Behari Mishra reported in (1998) 7 S.C.C. 84. That being so, the impugned order of punishment cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly quashed. It will be, however, open for the authority to proceed from the stage of submission of the inquiry report by giving notice containing the reasons for such difference of opinion and, if such 2 report and notice is given to the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, the petitioner will be under obligation to file his reply to the said show cause notice. The competent authority thereafter would proceed to pass its final order. It is, however, made clear that, if the authorities after production of a copy of this order would not choose to proceed afresh by issuing show cause notice within the aforementioned period, they will have no liberty to proceed against the petitioner after expiry of the period of six months from the date of filing of this order. The petitioner however, in the meantime would not be entitled to any financial benefit till a decision in this regard is taken by the Respondents or till the period of six months would expire from the date of filing of the order by him before the concerned competent authority namely the District Education Establishment Committee through its Secretary District Superintendent of Education, Bhojpur, Arrah. With the aforementioned observation this application is disposed of. Anjani/Ranjan ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J )