IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1951 of 2006 MADHUSUDAN PRASAD Versus THE MAGADH GRAMIN BANK & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner:M/s Arun Kumar Arun, Sanjay Kishore Singh & Siya Ram Pandey, Advocates For the Respondent Bank: Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate. ---------- 4 4.8.2008 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of punishment which has been imposed upon him which is contained in annexure-18 as well as the order dated 16.12.2005 where the punishment order has been affirmed by the appellate authority. Besides other submissions learned counsel for the petitioner relies on a decision rendered by the High Court in the case of Sarju Mistri vrs. Magadh Gramin Bank & Ors. reported in PLJR (3) 104 where it has been held that in the interest of fair play and justice a personal hearing should be given to the petitioner by the appellate authority. Petitioner has categorically stated that he demanded a personal hearing to explain many a thing which had emerged in the case in the meanwhile and he is convinced that if all the materials are taken into consideration in the manner for which the petitioner is willing to explain to the appellate authority he may get a similar treatment as one Kapildeo Prasad. In view of the decision in the case of Sarju Mistri (Supra) the appellate order dated 16.12.2005 contained in annexure 20 is hereby quashed with a direction that let a right of - 2 - personal hearing be given to the petitioner as well as consider his memo of appeal afresh and pass an appropriate order in this regard. This writ application is allowed to the extent indicated above. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)