IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13179 of 2009 SHALIGRAM SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2/ 12/10/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The assertion is that the petitioner was subjected to departmental proceedings with regard to furnishing of the antecedents of a person. The enquiry report exonerated him. The disciplinary authority differed with the report of exoneration and without a show cause notice on the difference of opinion specifically asserted in paragraph-10 of the writ application, passed the order of punishment of one black mark on 21.6.2007. The appeal against the same has been rejected on 12.8.2009 without a reasoned order. Learned counsel for the State prays for time to seek instructions. To this Court, from a conjoint reading of the order of the disciplinary authority dated 21.6.2007 and that of the appellate authority dated 12.8.2009 it is more than apparent that the enquiry officer exonerated the delinquent. It is further apparent from the two orders combined with the specific assertion in the 2 pleading that no notice in light of difference of opinion with the enquiry report was given to the petitioner. That was a requirement by the mandate of the law and the absence of which vitiates the impugned orders. Since there is no copy of the memo. of appeal on record and the matter is being disposed without a counter affidavit, this Court considers it appropriate to remand the matter to the appellate authority who shall examine this aspect from the memo. of appeal of the petitioner if he had raised the issue therein. If he had not raised the issue, the appellate order shall require no interference and the writ petition shall stand dismissed. If the petitioner has raised the issue in his memo. of appeal, the appellate order being unreasoned on this aspect becomes unsustainable and shall stand set aside when the appellate authority shall be required to pass a fresh reasoned and speaking order on the memo. of appeal. Let the same be done appropriately in accordance with law within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the appellate authority. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)