IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9392 of 2009 YOGENDRA KUMAR JAISWAL Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2/ 18.08.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 198 (9) dated 17.4.2009 whereby departmental proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner. Impugned order has been challenged on the ground that charge framed in the departmental proceeding and allegation in criminal case vide Special Vigilance Unit P.S. Case No. 3 of 2007 are similar and both should not continue simultaneously. Till disposal of the criminal case, departmental proceeding should either remain stayed or quashed. On perusal of FIR of vigilance case and the charge framed against the petitioner in the departmental proceeding, I find that charges framed in the departmental proceeding are different from allegation in vigilance case only charge no. 1 is connected to the allegation in criminal case. So far other charges are concerned, they are independent of the allegations made in the vigilance case. In the given circumstances, there is no reason for quashing the order initiating departmental proceeding or for staying the proceedings. Counsel for the petitioner contends that all documents needed for filing an effective show cause, have been seized by the Investigating Officer of Vigilance case, and he is unable to file his show cause, due to non-supply of these documents. In case petitioner - 2 - represents before the Conducting Officer for supply of documents, necessary orders be passed and documents supplied to the petitioner. There is no merit in the application as such dismissed. Sanjeet/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)