IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19491 of 2011 1. Sanjay Kumar Chaudhary Son Of Umesh Choudhary Resident Of Village - Bharsu, P.S.- Parbatta, District - Khgaria, Presently Posted As Assistant Sub-Inspector Of Police, Nalanda 2. Naresh Prasad Son Of Late Bajrangi Prasad Resident Of Village- Lagma, P.O. Shivkund, P.S. Dharhara, District Munger , At Present Posted As Sub-Inspector, Nalanda District 3. Narangi Baitha Son Of Late D.L. Mehta Resident Of Villae - Mohammadpur, P.O. Lahsuna, P.S. Punpun, District Patna At Present Posted As Sub-Inspector, Patna District 4. Astam Paswan Son Of Late Ambika Paswan Resident Of Village Muskipur, P.S. Tarapur, District Munger , At Present Posted As Assistant Sub-Inspector, By-Pass Thana, Patna District 5. Umesh Prasad Singh Son Of Sri Mahendra Singh Resident Of Village & P.O. - Chechar, P.S. Biddupr, District - Vaishali, At Present Posted As Sub-Inspector, Vaishali District 6. Kedar Prasad Singh Son Of Late Mahinddar Singh Village And Post Office - Godhiyari, P.S. Bishanpur, District - Darbhanga , At Present Posted As Sub-Inspector, Madhubani District 7. Badri Ram Son Of Sri Bhumi Ram Resident Of Village - Parmanadpur, P.S. Dhailad, District - Madhepura, At Present In Jail 8. Rana Ramesh Chandra Singh Son Of Late S.S.Singh Resident Of Village -Bindwara, P.S. Munger, District - Munger, At Present Posted As Sub-Inspector, Begusarai District 9. Ratnesh Kumar Son Of Late J.N. Raut Resident Of Village - Sitabdara P.O. Lalatola, P.S. Rivilganj, District - Saran 10. Prem Shankar Singh Son Of J.P. Singh Resident Of Village - Jaunapur, P.S. Patauri, District - Samastipur , Presently Posted In District Force, Sitamarhi Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Chief Secretary, Governmentof Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna 4. The Inspector General Of Police, Headquarter/Administration, Bihar, Patna 5. All Zonal Deputy Inspector General Of Police, Bihar, Patna 6. The Additional Director General, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna ---------------------------------- with 2 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19493 of 2011 1. Bacha Prasad Mishra Son Of Late Ramjee Mishra Village - Bakasera, P.S. - Itarhi, District - Buxar Retired Sub Inspector, Buxar District Force 2. Jitendra Prasad Singh Son Of Sri Shiv Bachan Singh Village & P.O.- Ramchandrapur, P.S.- Thawe, District - Gopalganj, Presently Posted As Assistant Sub-Inspector, Patna District Force 3. Ram Narayan Singh Son Of Late Dhruv Singh Resident Of Village - Harahia, P.O. & P.S. Shivai Patta, District - Muzaffarpur , Presently Posted As Assistant Sub-Inspector, Gaya District Force 4. Arun Kumar Singh Son Of Late Janardan Singh Resident Of Village & Post- Bharthi, P.S. - Ghoshi, District - Jehanabad, Presently Posted As Sub-Inpector, Shekpura, District Force 5. Ramashankar Singh Son Of Late Raj Paltan Singh Resident Of Villae - Surajpura, P.S. - Basantpur, District - Siwan, Presently Posted As Sub-Inspector Special Branch, Patna 6. Kailash Paswan Son Of Late Lalu Paswan Resident Of Village & P.O. & P.S. Maheshkhut, Distirct - Khagaria 7. Ashok Kumar Rai Son Of Sri Kesho Rai Resident Of Village & P.O.- Boksa, P.S. - Buxar, District - Buxar 8. Uday Pratap Singh Son Of Late Kalyan Kumar Singh Resident Of Village & P.O. & P.S. - Manihari, District - Katihar, Presently Posted As Sub-Inspector, District Force, Kaimur At Bhabhua 9. Surendra Kumar Son Of Late Sarju Prasad Resident Of Village - Ahirauli, P.S. - Industrial Area, Buxar, District - Buxar, Presently Posted As Sub-Inspector, C.I.D., Patna 10. Priya Ranjan Kumar Mehta Son Of Sri Bishnudoe Mehta Resident Of Village & P.O. Karanja, P.S. Naubatpur, District Presently Posted As S.I. Vaishali District Force Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna 4. The Inspector General Of Police, Headquarter/Administration, Bihar, Patna 5. All Zonal Deputy Insepector General Of Police, Bihar, Patna 6. The Additional Director General, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna ---------------------------------- with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21247 of 2011 1. Satya Narayan Singh S/O Late Laxman Singh Resident Of Village- Khajauta, P.S- Unwantnagar, District- Bhojpur At 3 Arrah Presently Posted As Special Branch Officer, Deo, Aurangabad. 2. Sayta Nand Jha S/O Late Pitambar Jha Resident Of Village- Lagma, P.S- Sonbarsa, District- Saharsa, Presently Suspended Sub-Inspector Of Police, Patna District- Force. 3. Uday Narayan Choubey S/O Late Shatrudhan Chaubey Resident Of Village- Atarsan, P.S- Rasulpur, District- Chapra Presently Suspended Sub- Inspector Of Police, Police Line- Patna. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Inspector General Of Police, Headquarter/ Administration, Bihar, Patna. 5. All Zonal Deputy Inspector General Of Police, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Additional Director General, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna. ---------------------------------- For the Petitioners: Mr. Vinod Kumar Kanth, Sr Advocate with M/s Prashant Sinha, Anil Kumar Sinha and Nagesh Pratap Singh, Advocates For the State : Mr.Raza Ahmad, A.A.G. IX Mr. Anjani Kumar, A.A.G. XI Mr. Umesh Kumar, AC to GP 1 For the Vigilance : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate with M/s Babirta Kumari, Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey and Ravi Shankar, Advocate ------------------ 3. 16.12.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the State. The questions of fact and law involved in these three applications are common and therefore they are being disposed by this common order. Learned Counsel for the petitioners do not press the issue of non maintainability of the departmental proceedings in view of pendency of the vigilance case. The petitioners are stated to be Police Officers. They are stated to be accused in separate trap cases instituted by the Department of Vigilance, alleged to have been caught red handed 4 accepting illegal gratification. Chargesheet has been submitted against them in their respective vigilance cases. Departmental proceedings have been initiated against them simultaneously. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the procedure for conduct of the departmental proceeding as provided in the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 2005, as amended from time to time, have not been followed. Relying on AIR 1975 SC 915 (Ram Chandra Keshav Arkey v. Govind Joti Chavre) and (2009) 6 SCC 736 (Ramdin Maurya (Dr.) v. State of Uttar Pradesh) it was submitted that if the procedure has been prescribed for conduct of the departmental proceeding, it has to be conducted in the prescribed manner alone and all other modes of performance are necessarily forbidden. The departmental proceedings have been initiated contrary to the procedure prescribed under the Rules. From a sample of memo of charge enclosed to CWJC No. 19493 of 2011 it is submitted that mere service of chargesheet with narration of the exhibits shall not suffice and the petitioners have to be given copies of the exhibits. They have to be provided reasonable opportunity to submit their defence and only thereafter can the proceeding be concluded in accordance with law. There can be no summary and/or collective disposal of the departmental proceedings. Such procedure denies reasonable opportunity and principles of natural justice. Counsel for the State has raised a preliminary objection that the writ applications are premature. The petitioners shall have adequate opportunity to defend themselves during the departmental proceedings. 5 A departmental proceeding commences with the issuance of chargesheet. The chargesheet is required to set out the allegations along with the documentary/oral evidence on basis of which the charge is proposed to be proved with copies furnished to the delinquent. From the memo of charge enclosed to CWJC No. 19493 of 2011 the Court finds that the delinquent named therein has been served the memo of charge along with the exhibits mentioned in the memo by which charges are proposed to be proved and in acknowledgement thereof he has also signed in the left hand column that he has received the exhibits. He has raised an objection that all papers have not been received by him. There shall be a difference between (exhibits) enclosed to the charge memo and the other papers demanded beyond the charge memo. The former is directly relevant; the relevance of the latter has to be decided during the departmental proceedings. What reasonable opportunity means depends on the facts of each case. What natural justice shall mean will again depend on the facts of each case. There can be no standard formula for reasonable opportunity and natural justice. In any event, all objections of the nature presently sought to be taken are well available to the petitioners at both stages of the departmental proceedings. The Court at this stage cannot interfere on apprehensions. The further objection of the petitioners that they have not even been told where to appear and who the Enquiry Officer is etc. are all answered adequately by order of the Director General of Police dated 10.10.2011 which is fully descriptive of the place where the departmental proceedings are to be conducted and also gives specific direction for the manner in which it has to be conducted. The writ applications are dismissed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.) 6