IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5980 of 2008 JITENDRA KUMAR PANDEY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ------- 4. 25.08.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The short question involved in this writ application is interpretation of Rule 76 of the Bihar Service Code read with Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. Rule 76 of the Bihar Service Code provides for removal of a Government servant, who remains absent from duty for more than five years under the provisions of the latter Rules. The petitioner is alleged to have absented from duty from 5.4.1992 to 15.8.2000. There is no controversy in fact on the basis of the impugned order on record that no departmental proceeding was held against the petitioner. Undoubtedly he has been furnished with an opportunity to represent and issuance of show cause upon the same in pursuance of the earlier writ petition filed by him complaining non-acceptance of joining. The submission of the learned counsel for the State that the action for removal of the petitioner was in consequence with the earlier direction of this Court does not impress the Court. No order of the Court can be contrary to law and in fact there was no such direction therein. It being the admitted position that a major penalty of removal for unauthorized absence has been inflicted without departmental proceeding, the impugned order is not sustainable. It is, accordingly, set aside. This shall, however, not inhibit the Respondents from proceeding afresh in accordance with law at their discretion. The writ application stands disposed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.) - 2 -