IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.368 of 2008 SHIVNANDAN PRASAD YADAV . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . For the Petitioner- Raghvendra Sharan Pandey, Adv. For the State- G.P. (9). ----------- 2/ 17/11/2009 The issue relates to the period 1.7.2000 to 31.8.2000 of unauthorized absence. A show cause notice was given to the petitioner on 5.6.2006. He replied on 6.6.2006 that he had to remain absent for unavoidable reasons of the illness of his wife. The cause shown by the respondent had to be the subject-matter of consideration by the respondents displaying application of mind. The impugned order of punishment dated 20.2.2007 says that the period in question shall be treated as unauthorized absence leading to break in service. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a short submission to assail annexure-1 that the respondents were required to record a finding whether the explanation of the petitioner was acceptable or not. They cannot ignore the cause shown and on their ipse dixit pass a final order finding the petitioner guilty. A counter affidavit has been filed. Naturally it cannot and does not travel beyond the impugned order dated 20.2.2007. The order being unreasoned and non-speaking as to why the explanation furnished by 2 the petitioner was not acceptable, renders the order arbitrary inasmuch as it refuses to consider relevant materials and then to either accept or reject it. The order dated 20.2.2007 is set aside. The writ application stands allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)