IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10237 of 2002 KRISHNA MOHAN PRASAD, Son of Late Sheo Nandan Prasad C/O Nawal Kishore Prasad, Advocate, MOhalla Gulbighat, Police Station sultanganj, Patna. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Director, Primary Education having his office at New Secretariat, Patna. 3.The District Superintendent of Education, Patna having his office at Collectorate Patna. 4.The Block Education officer/ Inspector having his office at Kanya Madhya Vidyalay, Naubatpur Anchal, Post Naubatpur, Police Station Naubatpur, District Patna. 5.The Drawing Disbursing officer/Headmaster, Madhya Vidyalay, Karai Anchal, Naubatpur, Post Karai, Police Station Naubatpur, District Patna. ----------- 3 24/6/2010 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. No counter affidavit has been filed in this case. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “(a)That the respondents be directed to make payment of salary from February, 2001 till today alongwith compound interest at the rate of 18% per annum till date of actual payment is made. (b)That respondent redirected to make payment of new fixation scale which has been fixed on 1.11.96 of each employee with effect from 1.1.96 till today date along with compound interest at the rate of 18% per annum from due date till the actual payment is made. (c) That the respondents be directed to make payment of arrear of increment since 1994 till today along with compound interest at the rate of 18% per annum from due date till the actual payment is made. (d) That the respondents be directed to make payment of arrear of Bonus since 1993 to its existence along with compound interest at the rate of 18% per annum from due date till the actual payment is made., (e) That the respondents be directed to make payment of subsistence allowance to the petitioner with effect from September, 1997 to 2000 along with compound interest at the rate of 18% per 2 annum from due date till the actual payment is made. (f)That respondent directed to open the service book which has been not open after rendering the service of ten years. (g)That respondents be directed to transfer the petitioner after revoke the suspension from previous school (accordingly Bihar Education Code).” The fact that the petitioner’s main grievance arises out of his order of suspension pending departmental enquiry and the petitioner has already been subjected to an order of punishment as contained in Annexure-1, would now leave nothing for this Court to decide in this matter, inasmuch as, this Court does not find any flaw in the following finding recorded by the Disciplinary Authority ^^-------- iz[kaM f'k{kk izlkj inkf/kdkjh ukSoriqj&A dks i=kad&43 fnukad 20-2-01 ds }kjk lwfpr fd;k x;k fd fnukad 20-1-01 dks oknh ds fo|ky; dk 2-20 cts vkSpd fujh{k.k fd;k x;k vkSj fo|ky; cUn ik;k x;k ,oa xzkeh.ksa ds }kjk ekSf[kd :i ls crk;k x;k fd f'k{kd fo|ky; dHkh ugha vkrs gSA xzkeh.ksa ds }kjk f'kdk;r dh x;h fd buds }kjk fo|ky; esa ;ksxnku ds mijkUr ges'kk fcuk lwpuk vuqifLFkr jgrs gSA iz[kaM f'k{kk izlkj inkf/kdkjh ds mDr i= ds vkyksd esa bl dk;kZy; ds i=kad 1276 fnukad 5- 2-01 ds }kjk Li"Vhdj.k iqNrs gq, osrukfn LFkxfr fd;k x;kA iqu% iz[kaM f'k{kk izlkj inkf/kdkjh ds i=kad 170 fnukad 10-8-01 ds }kjk lqfpr fd;k x;k fd Jh d`".k eksgu flagk] lgk;d f'k{kd fo|ky; esa ;ksxnku mijkUr fcuk lwpuk vuqifLFkr gS] ftldh lwpuk xzkeh.k turk us Hkh 3 dh gS] rnksijkUr bl dk;kZy; esa inLFkfir mik/kh{kd Jh lquhy dqekj ds ekeys dh tkap djk;h x;hA tkap izfrosnu esa vafdr fd;k x;k fd oknh Jh flag ds fo:n~/k yxk;h x;h vkjksi lgh gSA oknh ds }kjk fn;s x;s vH;kosnu ,oa lk{;ksa ls Li"V gksrk gS fd oknh vius dk;Z ls fcuk lwpuk vuqifLFkr jgs gS ,oa jk"Vh; ioZ tSls ekSds ij jk"Vz~h; ioZ tSls ekSds ij jk"Vz~h; ioZ tSls ekSds ij jk"Vz~h; ?ot dks ugha Qgjk dj jk"Vz~h; ?ot vieku fd;k x;k gSA oknh dks iwoZ esa Hkh fo|ky; ls fcuk lwpuk vuqifLFkr jgus ds vkjksi esa fuyafcr dj foHkkxh; dkjZokbZ ds v/khu fd;k x;k Fkk ,oa fuyacu eqfDR ds mijkUr oknh ds }kjk iwoZ dh Hkkafr fo|ky; ls fcuk lwpuk vuqifLFkr jgus dh f'kdk;r ik;h x;h] tks mids dk;Z ds izfr ykijokgh dk ?kksrd gSA vr% oknh dks fo|ky; ls fcuk lwpuk vuqifLFkr jgus ds dkj.k dk;Z ugha gh osu ugha ds fln~/kkar ij Qjojh 01 ls u;s fljs ls ;ksxnku dh frfFk rd osnukfn ns; ugha gksaxs ,oa oknh Jh izlkn dks vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd oknh rqjUr fo|ky; ij tk dj iBu&ikBu dk;Z lqfuf'pr djkosa ,oa Nk=ks ds Hkfo"; ds lkFk f[kyokM+ ugha djsaA ;g Hkh izlkn dks vafre psrkouh nh tkrh gSA** Learned Counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any procedural error or infirmity in course of departmental enquiry and this court cannot go into the merits of either of the charge relating to unauthorised absence from duty and/or disregarding the government instructions for unfurling national flag on the Independence Pay. 4 The punishment of warning and withholding of salary of the petitioner for his absence from duty infact is quite lenient and would require no interference by this Court. That being so, this application being wholly misconceived is accordingly dismissed. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)