IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13387 of 2009 RAKESH KUMAR SINHA, Son of Late Ram Kumar Lal, resident of Village- & P.O. Jagdishpur Tiyari, P.S. Noorsarai, District - Nalanda --------------- Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Ajey Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. R.K.Singh, AC to SC 19 ----------- 2 14-10-2009 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner was subjected to departmental proceedings on 7.6.2004. He contested the same when he was exonerated. Fresh departmental proceedings were then initiated against him on 6.2.2008 and fresh charges framed. The petitioner participated in the fresh inquiry which concluded with findings leading to a second show cause notice which the petitioner has replied also. Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the second departmental proceeding on some of the charges were not sustainable as they were the subject matter of consideration under the earlier charge, of which he was exonerated. The second submission is that the subsequent departmental enquiry is not in consonance with law and suffers from grave procedural irregularities. Once the petitioner has participated in the second departmental proceeding, the enquiry has been completed and second show cause notice issued, all that remains now is the final order on the departmental proceedings leading to its culmination. At this belated stage, the Court is not persuaded to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction as it is fully satisfied that both the issues presently urged - 2 - that the second departmental proceedings also took into consideration same charges for which he was earlier exonerated and that there have been grave procedural irregularity in the subsequent proceedings as they are matters which can adequately be considered in his reply to second show cause notice by the departmental authorities, to render justice if they be so satisfied. In (2006)8 SCC 776 ( P.D. Agrawal V.State Bank of India & Ors.), the contention was that the proceedings were much belated and there have been grave irregularities in procedure vitiating the departmental proceedings. The Apex Court held that once the proceedings have been concluded delay may become irrelevant and the matter shall then be considered on merits on all its aspects of challenge in accordance with law. If the petitioner is correct in his submission that he has already filed his reply to the second show cause notice, let departmental proceedings be concluded positively within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of this order before the Departmental Authority. The learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage seeks liberty to submit any additional pleadings, if required, in reply to the second show cause. If the cause shown by the petitioner has not been disposed of and the departmental proceedings have not been concluded, it goes without saying that the petitioner shall be at liberty to supplement his pleadings . - 3 - The writ application stands disposed off with the aforesaid direction. NKS/- ( Navin Sinha, J)