IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2472 of 2009 Lal Saheb Tiwary . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Satyanvrat Verma, Adv. For the State:- Mr. S. Rana Ahmad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vishwambhar Prasad, Adv. ----------- 3. 08.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner, a Constable is aggrieved by the order dated 19.6.2007 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Purnia imposing the punishment of reversion to the basic scale for two years only. His appeal against the same has been dismissed as also the memorial has been rejected. After some argument learned counsel for the petitioner moulds the submissions and relief sought by submitting that the punishment in effect was a monetary penalty by reduction of the pay scale to the basic level for a period of two years only. The financial loss that the petitioner had to suffer for two years was considered sufficient punishment. After the expiry of the period of punishment, he has to revert to his original scale. The punishment cannot be operative beyond two years. He does not stand relegated permanently to his basic scale requiring him to work his way up all over again. Keeping him at the basic 2 scale beyond two years to start afresh from the date of punishment is inconsistent with the limitation period of two years mentioned in the order. Strong reliance has been placed on Rule 832(a) of the Bihar Police Manual. The Court finds that this aspect has not been urged either in the appeal or the memorial much less in the writ application and therefore the respondents have also not had the opportunity to deal with the same in their counter affidavit. It shall therefore not be proper for the Court today to consider this aspect outside the pleadings at this stage. The Court therefore permits the petitioner to represent before the Superintendent of Police for the aforesaid purpose. Since the contention has been raised from the provisions of the Police Manual itself and the issue had not been raised in the appeal or memorial, the rejection of the same on other grounds/merits by the appellate authority and the Director General of Police, by reason of the present order of this Court, shall be no impediment for fresh independent consideration by the Superintendent of Police limited to this aspect of the matter. The Superintendent of Police stands 3 vested with the power by the order of the Court. Let such consideration be done and final orders passed within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The Court expects that if the respondents find justification in the claim or in any part of the claim, necessary consequential orders shall be passed simultaneously. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)