IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9424 of 2009 NAGENDRA PRASAD SINGH OF INDIAN FOREST SERVICE ( (RETD), S/O LATE SATYA NARAYAN SINGH, WHO WAS WORKING ON THE POST OF PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, BIHAR IN THE ENVIRONMENT & FOREST DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, RESIDENT AT FINANCE DEPARTMENT COLONY, ROAD NO.3, KHAJPURA, MAURAY PATH, PATNA, P.O., B.V. COLLEGE, PATANA-14. ........................ PETITIONER Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, FORESTS AND WILDLIFE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, PARYAVARAN BHAWAN, C.G.O. COMPLEX LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-3. 2. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA.-15 3. THE COMMISSIONER & PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF BIHAR, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS, SINCHAI BHAWAN, PATNA-15. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF DEPARTMENTAL INQUIRIES, OLD SECRETARIAT, HUTMENTS, PATNA-15. 5. THE JOINT SECRETARY OF THE GOVT. OF BIHAR, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS, SINCHAI BHAWAN, PATANA-15. 6. THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF BIHAR, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & FORESTSS, SINCHAI BHAWAN, PATANA-15 .................... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2 7-8-2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel appearing for the Union of India. A disciplinary proceeding was ordered to be initiated against the petitioner within four years of his retirement and charges were issued upon him within that period but service could not be effected for few months and when the charges were served on the petitioner, by that time four years had elapsed from his retirement. On that ground the petitioner approached the learned Administrative Tribunal through O.A.No.. 50 of 2006 which was dismissed. After considering the relevant provisions in the rules and several judgments - 2 - of the Supreme Court including that in the case of Union of India Vrs. K.V. Jankiraman ( AIR 1991 SC 2010), the Tribunal held that by delaying service of charges the employee cannot alter the date on which a formal decision was taken to initiate departmental proceeding. Against that order of the Tribunal dated 13-7-2008 the petitioner preferred writ petition before this court being C.W.J.C.No. 16510 of 2008. That was permitted to be withdrawn by order dated 15-1-2009 in view of prayer on behalf of petitioner for withdrawal of the application with liberty that he may file application for review . The review application filed by the petitioner has now been rejected by order dated 28-5-2009 because the Tribunal did not find any error in its earlier order . We have perused both the orders under challenge. We find no illegality or error in the view taken by the Tribunal. The writ petition is found to be without any merit and it is accordingly dismissed. It is expected that the disciplinary proceeding shall now be concluded without any delay in accordance with law. ( Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ) ( Anjana Prakash, J) Naresh - 3 -