IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8139 of 2002 RAMANUJ PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4. 10.02.2009 Heard leaned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner was proceeded with departmentally. The charge was of alleged illegal withdrawal of a sum of Rs. 14,72,246/-. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report. Five charges were proved, of two he was exonerated. By order dated 15.3.2002, he was visited with major punishment of withholding of his salary for the period of suspension and stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect. Contrary to the same the respondents in paragraph 15 of their counter affidavit have stated that the punishment was minor and hence there was no need of giving him second show cause notice. It appears that an FIR has also been lodged on 26.1.2000 against the petitioner and others registered as Bimramganj PS Case No. 23 of 2000 and which is pending trial. The petitioner is stated to have retired in December 2003. On the face of the order of punishment, the third punishment of withholding his posting with financial powers has lots its relevance in view of his subsequent superannuation. That leaves the first two punishments which undoubtedly are major in nature. If the petitioner was to be visited with a major punishment, the law required the respondents to give him a second show cause notice. This becomes more important in view of partial exoneration of the petitioner in the enquiry report also. This Court does not have the benefit of the manner in which the respondents dealt with the matter after submission of the enquiry report. Considering the nature of the allegations of alleged financial misappropriation, this Court considers it proper to hold that the order of punishment dated 20.,3.2002 is vitiated for non compliance of service of a second show cause with a liberty to the petitioner to represent against the same. The order dated 20.3.2002 is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded to the disciplinary authority to proceed afresh from the stage of submission of the enquiry report in accordance with law and conclude the departmental proceedings within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. This shall be without prejudice to the criminal prosecution stated to be pending against the petitioner. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)