IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9734 of 2009 BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI, SON OF LATE RAJDEO PRASAD DWIVEDI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHANDIHA, POLICE STATION PURNAHIYA, DISTRICT-SHEOHAR. ... ... PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, TIRHUT DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR, AT & PO MUZAFFARPUR. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SITAMARHI, AT & PO SITAMARHI. 4. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SITAMARHI, AT & PO SITAMARHI. ... ... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 3. 17.8.2009. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order bearing Memo No.805 dated 7th September,2005 (Annexure-5) where under punishment has been imposed upon him by the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi differing with the enquiry report (Annexure-4) where under petitioner was exonerated, copy of the enquiry report was never served on the petitioner, which was violative of the provisions contained in Sub Clause(2) of Rule-18 of C.C.A. Rules. Petitioner was further punished by not allowing him salary for the suspension period as would appear from the order bearing Memo No.406 dated 19th April,2006 (Annexure-6). Assailing the two orders (Annexures 5 and 6), petitioner filed appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, who also without appreciating the ground - 2 - taken in support of the appeal that the punishment order was violative of Sub Clause(2) of Rule-18 of C.C.A. Rules as also Sub Clause(3) of Rule-97 of the Bihar Service Code dismissed the appeal under order dated 9.9.2008. Petitioner has challenged the three orders by filing the present writ application. When the writ petition was taken up on 13.8.2009, this Court asked the counsel for the petitioner to examine whether any revision in terms of the provisions contained in Rule-28 of Bihar C.C.A. Rules,2005 against the impugned order is maintainable before the revisional authority. Learned counsel, having examined the rules, has submitted that against the three orders, petitioner has remedy before the revisional authority. Accordingly, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to assail the aforesaid three orders (Annexures 5,6 and 8) before the revisional authority by filing the revision as early as possible in any case within 30 days from today and if such revision is filed - 3 - N.H./ within the time indicated in this order, the learned revisional authority shall condone the delay if any in filing the revision and thereafter proceed to hear the same on merit and pass orders as early as possible in any case within three months from the date of filing of the revision application. ( V.N. Sinha,J.)