IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15758 of 2001 CHANDRAMOULI PRASAD aged 48 years, son of Shri Basudeo Prasad, resident of village Imadpur, P.S. Hulasganj, District, Jehanabad…………… Petitioner. Versus (1)THE STATE OF BIHAR (2)The Secretary to Government, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna. (3)The Special Secretary to Government, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna. (4)The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna. (5)The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Samastipur (6)The Under Secretary to the Govt of Bihar, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna. (7)The Joint Secretary, Management Cell, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna. For the petitoner:-Mr. Taj Bahadur Singh, Sr.Adv Mr. Sharad Kumar Singh For the State :-Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Jc to AAG-9. ----------- 5/ 17-Oct-08 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This Court finds no irregularity or illegality in the departmental proceeding in which the enquiry report in respect of various charges shows application of mind to the defence of the petitioner and thereafter charges have been found to be proved. The most serious charge is that Rs.17 Lacs was paid in excess which was facilitated by the action of the petitioner as found by the Enquiry Officer in respect of Charge No.5. On that basis the impugned order of 2 dismissal contained in Annexure-13, 19.10.2001 has been passed after clearly noticing the recommendation of the Bihar Public Service Commission proposing for lesser punishment. The impugned order mentions that the Government was not persuaded to impose a lesser punishment in spite of recommendation of the Commission to that effect. The impugned order is found to be in accordance with law because it is well established that the recommendations of the Commission are not binding on the State. The order shows due application of mind to the recommendation of the Commission. The disciplinary proceeding is found to suffer from no legal infirmity. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner on the basis of an order dated 18.1.2008 passed in CWJC NO.1219/02 (Om Prakash V.The State of Bihar & Ors.) that the punishment of dismissal awarded to Om Prakash in relation to the same transaction was set aside by this Court on a finding that there has not been proper consideration of the recommendation made by the Commission which was in favour of that 3 petitioner. The said Om Prakash is said to be a subordinate officer to the petitioner posted at that place in the capacity of Assistant Engineer. Even if the nature of the charges were same the petitioner as Executive Engineer had greater role of power and greater responsibility to bear. On going through the impugned order, as noticed above it is found that as Disciplinary Authority, the competent authority has applied it mind duly to the recommendations of the Commission. In the facts of the case it is difficult for this Court to hold that the punishment awarded to the petitioner is shocking to the judicial conscience. Hence, this Court finds itself unable to interfere with the order and with the quantum of the punishment also. In that view of the matter the writ petition is dismissed. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)