IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15174 of 2009 1. GURUBACHAN SINGH S/O LATE ADITYA NARAIN SINGH R/O VILL.- AMNAUR, P.O. & P.S. AMNAUR, DISTT.- SARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPTT. OF HOME, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPTT. OF HOME GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE BIHAR, PATNA 4. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BHAGALPUR ZONE BHAGALPUR 5. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, EASTERN RANGE BHAGALPUR 6. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BHAGALPUR 7. THE UNDER SECRETARY, DEPTT. OF HOME (POLICE) GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 8. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, HEADQUARTER (1ST.) CUM CONDUCTING OFFICER BHAGALPUR ----------- 2. 30.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner was dismissed from service by an order dated 16.9.2004. In appeal on 14.8.2005 this was reduced to stoppage of five increments and that the period between the date of dismissal and reinstatement shall be treated as period of suspension. Thereafter in exercise of powers under Rule 853A of the Bihar Police Manual, the order dated 14.8.2005 has been set aside and the dismissal restored on 30.5.2008. It is not necessary for this Court to discuss the detailed facts of the case in view of the very short legal submission made on behalf of the petitioner supported by a Bench decision of this Court in 2001(4) PLJR 177 (Anjan Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.) 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suo motu powers provided for in Rule 853A of the Bihar Police Manual for enhancement of punishment shall have to be read as a power to be exercised within reasonable time quantified by this Court as three years. In this present case, this power has been exercised well beyond three years. A Bench of this Court in Anjan Kumar Singh (supra) in the relevant extract of Paragraph-9 of the judgment held as follows:- “…………..Even assuming that the order passed by the appellate authority was reviewed in exercise of the power under Rule 853A (a) of the Manual, it could have been exercised in any manner beyond a period of more than three years. The provision as envisaged under Rule 853A of the Manual, in that view of the matter, is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case.” The order dated 30.5.2008 and the consequential orders dated 15.10.2009 as contained in Annexure-24 stands set aside. The writ application stands allowed to the extent indicated above. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)