IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16741 of 2011 Raj Nath Singh son of Late Shiv Bachan Singh, Resident of village Ghuri Chak, P.S.Bihta, Dist. Patna at present Assistant Godown Manager, State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Dist. Munger (dismissed). ---Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Food & Consumer Protection, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Sone Bhawan, Veer Chand Patel Path, Patna through its Managing Director. 4. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Sone Bhawan, Veer Chand Patel Path, Patna 5. The Chief of Administration, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Sone Bhawan, Veer Chand Patel Path, Patna. 6. The District Manager, Munger, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation. --Respondents. ---------- 02 23.09.2011 Heard Mr. B.K. Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R.S. Pradhan, learned senior counsel for the respondent- Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. ( for short ‘Corporation) and Mr. Satyeshwar Prasad, learned Assistant Counsel to Government Pleader no. 9. Petitioner has filed the present application seeking issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s) to quash the order contained in memo no. 6529 dated 24.07.2009 (Annexure-14) whereby, on conclusion of the departmental proceeding, the petitioner was inflicted with punishment of dismissal from service as also recovery of certain amounts. He is also aggrieved by the order dated 23.09.2009 (Annexure-17) whereby his application seeking review of the order 2 dated 24.07.2009, has been considered and rejected. It is the stand of the petitioner that under the relevant provisions the review was maintainable. It is stated in paragraph no. 33 of the writ petition that aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders he filed an appeal before the respondent no.2 ( the Principal Secretary, Department of Food & Consumer Protection under Rule 28A of the Service Conduct & Disciplinary Rule on 05.11.2009, but the same has not been considered and disposed of. Learned counsel for the respondent Corporation submits that from the pleadings made in the writ petition it does not appear that the appeal was filed in appropriate format. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would supplement his application/appeal as set out in paragraph no. 33 of the writ petition by filing memorandum in appropriate format within a period of four weeks from today and the same may be considered and disposed of in accordance with law by the concerned appellate authority. Having heard the parties and on going through the materials on record, this Court is satisfied that the matter be disposed of by the following order:- Let the petitioner supplement his appeal filed on 05.11.2009 by filing details in appropriate format within a period of 04 weeks from today along with a copy of the present order. If the petitioner completes the aforesaid formality within the aforesaid time, this Court would require the respondent no.2 to consider and dispose of the appeal on its own merit in accordance with law within a period 3 of 03 months from the date of receipt of the memo of appeal, as per the present order. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)