IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3108 of 2006 MANI BHUSHAN PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS WITH CIVIL REVIEW No.129 of 2008 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus MANIBHUSHAN PRASAD ----------- 5. 15.09.2008. State of Bihar has sought review of the order dated 24.7.2006 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 9549 of 2004 on the ground that the appeal of the petitioner referred to thereunder was not pending in the office of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, which fact has been accepted by the petitioner himself in his letter dated 11.9.2006, Annexure-A to the show cause filed in M.J.C. No. 3108 of 2006. Perusal of Annexure-A dated 11.9.2006 indicates that petitioner visited the office of the D.I.G on 11.9.2006 and when he learnt that the Memo of Appeal sent to the D.I.G., Respondent No.3 under certificate of posting dated 4.8.2004, Annexure-3 of reply to the show cause filed in M.J.C. is not traceable in the office of Respondent No.3 then he accepted over representation dated 11.9.2006 that the Memo of Appeal is not traceable in the office of the D.I.G., Respondent No.3. In this connection it is pointed out that there is a presumption that a memo dispatched under certificate of posting must have been received by the addressee. Reference in this connection - 2 - may be made to the case of Dineshwar Pd. Singh Versus Smt. Manorma Devi reported in 1978(1) BLJ 700. As the Memo of Appeal dated 4.8.2004 was not available in the office of the D.I.G. petitioner again obliged the D.I.G., Respondent No.3 by filing another Memo of Appeal dated 27.11.2006, Annexure-4 which was sent to the office of the D.I.G. under registered cover. Receipt showing dispatch under registered cover is dated 28.11.2006 and has been annexed with the reply to the show cause. Aforesaid appeal dated 27.11.2006 has not yet been disposed of. In the circumstances, D.I.G., Respondent No.3 is directed to dispose of the appeal dated 27.11.2006, Annexure-4 and until the appeal is considered, petitioner be allowed to serve on the reverted post of Dafadar. Both the contempt application and the review application are, accordingly disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha,J.)