IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1311 of 2009 1. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY EDUCATION DIRECTORATE, BUDH MARG, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, JEHANABAD …….. ……………………………..RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS Versus BRIJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA, S/O SHRI SIDHESHWAR MISHRA, R/O VILL- ANANDPURA, P.S. BELSARA (DEO), DISTT. AURANGABAD …….. PETITIONER-RESPONDENT. ----------- For the Appellants:- Mr. Prabhakar Tekriwal, Advocate. ----------- 4. 07.01.2010. Reg. I.A. No. 6538/2009. This is an application for condonation of 400 days of delay in preferring the appeal. This Court had earlier issued notice to the respondent. On perusal of the office notes it transpires that the service of notice on respondent has been treated to be valid. In view of the aforesaid we presume there is no opposition for condonation of delay and, accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal stands condoned. I.A. No. 6538/2009 is, accordingly, allowed. Reg. LPA No. 1311/2009. 2 As we have condoned the delay we are inclined to take up the appeal in admission. Heard Mr. Prabhakar Tekriwal, learned counsel for the State on the question of admission. Questioning the substantiality of the order dated 14.07.2008 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 6947/2005; the present appeal has been preferred. On a perusal of the order passed by the learned single Judge it is clear as noon day that he has quashed the order of dismissal of the respondent – employee on the ground that the criminal court has acquitted him in G.R. Case No. 13971/1994, corresponding to Tr. No. 1550/2004. Be it noted, at no point of time a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the respondent – employee. Once he has been acquitted in the criminal court and, that too, after a full-fledged trial as is evincible from the order of the learned single Judge, we are of the considered opinion that direction of reinstatement by the learned single Judge cannot be found fault with. In the result, we do not perceive any 3 merit in this appeal and, accordingly, the same stands dismissed in limine. Dilip ( Dipak Misra, C.J. ) ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. )