Letters Patent Appeal No.409 OF 2000 ------ Appeal against the judgment and Order dated 27-10- 1999 passed by a Bench of this courtin C.W.J.C.No.7334 of 1998 ------ STATE OF BIHAR & ORS-------------(Appellant) Versus RADHEY SHAYAM PRASAD SINGH------(Respondents) ------ Advocate for the Appellant;- Mr. J.P.Karn, AAG-2 Mr. Ranjan Kumar, J.C ------- Advocate for the Respondent:- Mr. Siya Ram Sahay ------ P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.N. SINGH ------- Shiva Kirti & J.N.Singh,JJ Heard learned counsel for the Appellant/State Of Bihar and learned counsel for the respondent/employee. 2. The writ petitioner ( respondent herein ) was awarded certain punishments in a disciplinary proceeding under Rule 55-A of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal ) Rules1930. The writ court has allowed the writ petition and quashed the order of punishment after noticing that in the order of punishment it is indicated that punishment was being imposed on account of irregularity in the matter of earth work as reported by the Flying Squad in respect of particular Division in the year 1985- 86-87 and after further noticing that undisputedly while posted at Konar Canal Subdivision No.1, Bagodar the petitioner had never conducted or supervised any earth work. 3. Even in the Letters Patent Appeal in paragraph-7 it is admitted that the charge in respect of the 2 writ petitioner was connected with tiles work and not earth work. 4 In paragraph-8 of the L.P.A. it has further been clarified that the earth work relates to Konar Canal Division, Dumri whereas tiles work relates to Konal Canal Division, Bagodar, the place where the writ petitioner was posted at the relevant time. 5. A perusal of available materials show that there is no finding to show that charges in relation of tiles work where the writ petitioner was posted at the time were found proved or that the petitioner was involved with any omission or commission to show misconduct or any dereliction of duty on his part. 6. Thus, on a perusal of the available materials we find no good reason to interfere with the order of the writ court wherein it has been held that the order of punishment in respect of the writ petitioner has been passed on account of non- application of mind. As a result, we find no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed but without costs. (Shiva Kirti Singh,J) ( J.N.Singh,J) Patna High Court,Patna Dated the 13th May,2008 NAFR Naresh