IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13525 of 2000 SANJIT KUMAR CHOUDHARY & ORS. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 6 22.9.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. On going through the materials on record, this Court is satisfied that the original petitioner had no defence against the charge that he deserted his duties from 14.3.1992 and never appeared even in the departmental proceeding initiated in the year 1998. The additional counter affidavit shows that the enquiry report was received by son of the original petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the said son was minor which shows that the son was dependent upon his father and very much is part of household. It further appears from the additional counter affidavit that notices in the departmental proceeding had been issued. In the facts of the case, this Court finds no merit and there is no good reason to interfere with the punishment awarded to the original petitioner on account of his continued absence from duty for a very long time. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. If any salary of the petitioner for which he had 2 admittedly worked and was not paid, may be paid to the heirs of the original petitioner and any other lawful dues may also be paid to them in accordance with law. (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) sk