IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14079 of 2010 1. VIJAY KUMAR PASWAN, SON OF LATE BIRANCHI PASWAN, R/O VILLAGE DILAWARPUR, P.O. + P.S. BIHTA, DISTRICT PATNA. AT PRESENT RESIDENCE OF VILLAGE KORIAMCHAUK, P.O. BARA, P.S. + DIST. ARWAL. 2. RAJENDRA PRASAD, SON OF LATE KEDAR PRASAD, R/MOHALLA LANGAR TOLI GALI(NALA ROAD) H/O ARUN MEHTA, P.O.+ P.S. KADAM KUAN, DIST. PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY OF THE TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VIRCHAND PATEL MARG, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE ADMINISTRATOR, BIHAR STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, BIHAR, PATNA VIRCHAND PATEL MARG, PATNA-1. 4. THE SPECIAL OFFICER, BIHAR STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, BIHAR, VIRCHAND PATEL MARG, PATNA. ----------- 02. 27.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation(hereinafter referred to as the Corporation). 2. Petitioners at the relevant time served the Corporation on the post of Security Guard. They have been dismissed from the service of the Corporation under order bearing Memo No.3142 dated 17.7.2003, Annexure-7 as after conduction of the departmental proceeding it was found against them that they were responsible for theft of Aluminium sheets from the bus of the Corporation. On the basis of the allegation of theft criminal case was also lodged against the two petitioners in Gardanibagh police station for the offence of theft under Sections-379, 411 and 461 of the Penal Code. The criminal case filed againt the two petitioners was tried by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna vide G.R./TR No.3086 of 1999. Under judgment dated 18.7.2008 the two petitioners were acquitted of the - 2 - charge of theft of Aluminium sheets from the bus of the Corporation. The judgment of the trial court dated 18.7.2008 is contained in Annexure-9 to this application. In the light of the judgment of the trial court petitioners requested the competent authority in the Corporation to review the punishment of dismissal under their representation dated 29.7.2008, 15.8.2008 and 21.4.2010, which is contained in Annexures-10 series and even after passage of more than two years of submission of the representation by the petitioners for reconsideration of punishment order, the same has not been considered and disposed of. 3. Let the Administrator of the Corporation consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.7.2008, 15.8.2008 and 21.4.2010, Annexures-10 series in the light of the findings of the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna contained in GR/TR No.3086 of 1999 dated 18.7.2008, Annexure-9 in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order before the Administrator. It goes without saying that while considering the representation, the Administrator shall be obliged to pass speaking order indicating as to why the punishment order dated 17.7.2003, Annexure-7 be not cancelled in the light of the findings of the trial court contained in judgment dated 18.7.2008, Annexure-9. 4. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)