IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.864 of 2003 Shri Ram Chandra Jha, son of late Jagar Nath Jha, resident of Village and P.O. Hatni, P.S. Ghoghardiha, District- Madhubani ---- Petitioner ----- Appellant. Versus 1. The Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union Ltd. through its Arbitrator, West of Gandhi Maidan, Biscomaun Bhawan, Patna. 2. The Administrator, Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union Ltd., Biscomaun Bhawan, Patna. 3. The Special Officer (Administration), Biscomaun, West of Gandhi Maidan, Patna. 4. The In-charge Officer (Damage) Biscomaun, West of Gandhi Maidan, Patna. 5. The Senior Range Officer, Biscomaun, Mirzapur, District- Darbhanga ---- Respondents ---- Respondents. ------ 7. 17.12.2009 Heard Mr. Baidya Nath Thakur for the appellant, and Mr. Rajesh Prasad Choudhary for the respondents. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of High Court of Judicature at Patna has been preferred by the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 10882 of 2001 (Shri Ram Chandra Jha Versus The Bihar State Cooperative Marketing Union Limited and others), whereby the writ petition has been dismissed and the order of respondents to recover a sum of Rs. 2,09,933.10P, and withholding of two increments with cumulative effect, has been upheld. 2. A brief statement of facts is essential for the disposal of the appeal may be indicated. The writ petitioner was in the services of respondent no.1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Biscomaun”). By order dated 13.12.1997, he was informed that he had been held guilty of shortage of certain fertilizers and pesticides valued at Rs. 9,156.60P, and he was accordingly ordered to deposit the amount in instalments. It 2 was made clear that failure to carry out the order may result in dismissal from service. The petitioner did not challenge the same. By order dated 20.6.1998, the petitioner was held responsible for shortage of fertilizers and pesticides valued at Rs. 1,62, 807.85P and he was asked to deposit the money within one month from the date of receipt of the order. In view of non-compliance of two orders, the petitioner was dismissed from service by order dated 1.9.1998, and a sum of Rs. 1, 71, 934.45P was directed to be recovered from him. By corrigendum dated 2.11.1998, the petitioner was directed to deposit a further sum of Rs. 1,27,033.04P, for identical reasons. The petitioner challenged the orders by preferring C.W.J.C. No. 11589 of 1998 in this Court. It was allowed by order dated 27.1.2000, the order of dismissal as well as the corrigendum were quashed, on the ground that the order of dismissal was based on a preliminary enquiry. However, the respondents were given the liberty to proceed against the petitioner, and it was made clear that the charge-sheet had not been quashed. 3. The petitioner was accordingly reinstated and memo of charge dated 22.4.2000, was served on him incorporating the charges. The first two charges related to disobedience of the order dated 13.12.1997 and 20.6.1998, whereby he was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 9,126.6.60P, and Rs. 1, 62, 807.85P respectively. The third charge related to shortage of pesticides valued at Rs. 1,27,033.04P. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report, whereby he found the petitioner guilty of the three charges, and he was called upon to submit his show-cause. On a consideration of the entire materials, the learned 3 disciplinary authority passed the impugned order dated 19.4.2001, whereby he has been directed to refund a sum of Rs. 2, 09, 933.10P, towards the cost of actual losses, and the punishment of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect has been imposed. The petitioner preferred C.W.J.C. No.10882 of 2001 which has been dismissed. 4. While raising the grievance with respect to the order of the learned Single Judge, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is evident on a plain reading of the order dated 27.1.2000, passed in C.W. J.C. No. 11589 of 1998, that the order of dismissal from service had been set aside because the same had been passed on the basis of a mere preliminary enquiry. The order impugned herein has been passed on the same materials. He next submits that charge-sheet was not served on him. He lastly submits that no reason has been assigned in the impugned order. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent has supported the impugned order. 6. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. It appears on a plain reading of the order disposing of the previous writ petition that the order of dismissal from service was set aside on the basis of ex-parte preliminary enquiry. However, learned counsel for the petitioner fails to see the events which have taken place after disposal of the earlier writ petition. It is evident from the materials available on record that thereafter a charge-sheet was framed, was duly served on him, and a 4 full-fledged enquiry was conducted leading to the enquiry report, followed by the impugned order of punishment. The contention is stated only to be rejected. 7. As to the second submission, it is evident from a perusal of the materials on record that charge-sheet was framed, and the copy of which was served on him. 8. As to the third submission, the learned Enquiry Officer had submitted a detailed report wherein he found the petitioner guilty of the charges. If the impugned order of punishment is read with the enquiry report, then requirement of law is satisfied. Law is well settled that the learned disciplinary authority is not required to assign any reason in support of the order of punishment, if he agrees with the enquiry report. On the other hand, reasons are required to be recorded by the disciplinary authority if he disagrees with the enquiry report which is not the case here. We are indeed left with a strong feeling that the petitioner has been let off very lightly. 9. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand), which shall be recovered along with the aforesaid amount. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar ,J. ) (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)