IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8517 of 1999 Girija Nandan Kumar, S/o Sri Darbari Kumar, resident of Village Marpa Mohan, P.S. Phenhara, Dist. East Champaran, at present Assistant Teacher, Girls Middle School, Madhuban, Dist. East Champaran. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 3. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Establishment Committee, Motihari, East Champaran. 4. The District Superintendent of Education, East Champaran. 5. The Regional Development Officer, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. -------- Respondents ----------- 5 18.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. In this writ application, the petitioner has assailed the order of punishment of warning as also withholding the salary beyond subsistence allowance and the appellate order affirming the same by way of dismissal of appeal on the ground of limitation. Mr. Tara Nath Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner, had initially sought to assail the order of punishment on the ground that once there was a memo of charge against the petitioner for a departmental proceeding, the respondent could not have taken recourse to the process of inflicting punishment on the basis of only show-cause reply filed by the petitioner. 2 In the considered opinion of this Court, this issue will not be relevant in view of the specific Rules framed in respect of the teachers, namely, fcgkj jkT; jktdh;d`r izkjfEHkd fo|ky; f'k{kd ¼LFkkukUrj.k ,oa vuq'kklfud dkjZokbZ½ fu;ekoyh 1994, wherein, under Rule 8, it has been specifically provided that only major punishment has to be inflicted after taking recourse of departmental proceeding. Thus, in view of Rule 8, it becomes clear that the minor punishment can be inflicted even on the basis of giving a show-cause notice. In any event, the petitioner cannot be said to have suffered any prejudice, inasmuch as, the petitioner was allowed an opportunity to put his statement of defence against the charge of his absence from duty and that the authority had passed the order after considering such defence. This Court also can not ignore that absence from duty of the teachers has become a common phenomena and it is for this purpose that in the 1994 Rules, number of authorities have been vested with the power to make sudden inspection of the school as also to take action for such unauthorized absence of 3 the teachers. This Court, therefore, would find no merit in the first submission made by Mr. Jha as with regard to the correctness of the impugned order of punishment. There is, however, substance in the second submission of Mr. Jha that when for the same misconduct of being found absent from duty in course of sudden inspection of the authorities of the Education Department, other teachers were also subjected to the same punishment of both warning as also stoppage of salary beyond subsistence allowance, the appellate authority, the Commissioner of the Division, had interfered in the part of such punishment of only upholding the order of punishment of warning and striking with the remaining punishment of withholding of salary beyond subsistence allowance. This aspect of the matter specifically raised in the paragraph no.8 of the writ application has not been controverted by the respondents in their counter affidavit. It is well settled that the authorities have to maintain a common and uniform criteria even in the matter of 4 awarding punishment if misconduct is the same. In view of the fact that other teachers, having the same charge of being found absent from duty in course of sudden inspection, have ultimately been allowed to get full salary for the period of suspension, this Court would also partly set aside the order of punishment of the petitioner and direct that the petitioner should also be paid his salary for the period of suspension alike other teachers. It is, however, made clear that this Court has also not interfered in the punishment of warning and to that extent, the impugned order stands affirmed. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)