IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.25 of 2011 Ram Pravesh Singh, Son of late Shio Das Singh,R/o Vill-Parenyama,Post Office-Wazirpur,Via-Vikram,Police Station-Vikram,District-Patna. . Versus 1.The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary,Government of Bihar,Patna. 2.The Director General & Inspector General of Police,Bihar,Patna. 3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,Munger Range, Munger. 4.The Superintendent of Police, Munger. For Appellant:Bindhyachal Singh with Vijay Bharti. For State:Shashi Shekhar Prasad SinhaAdv A/C to G.P. 17. ----------- 6 24.06.2011 Heard the parties. Petitioner was a constable in the District of Munger and he proceeded on casual leave on 09.08.85, but overstayed for a long period without sanction of leave and ultimately claims to have joined on 09.09.1987 in the meantime a suspension order was issued and departmental proceeding was initiated on account of unauthorized absence from duty without leave. An enquiry report was ultimately submitted against him in August 1987 and on that basis the show cause was issued to him as to why he should not be dismissed from service .The appellant submitted his show cause raising several pleas including a plea of mental illness. He also complained that he had not received any notice of the departmental proceeding . 2 Ultimately he was dismissed from service by order dated 17.12.1993. His appeal was also dismissed and the writ petition preferred by him bearing CWJC No.5745 of 1997 was finally dismissed by order under appeal dated 05.08.2010. The main issue raised on behalf of the appellant is that he could not participate in the departmental proceeding for want of notice and in such circumstances the proceeding including the enquiry report as well as the order of dismissal are bad in law for violation of principles of natural justice. In order to appreciate the aforesaid submission, this Court directed the State Counsel to produce the original records of the preceding. The records have been produced and it stands admitted that there is no material to show that notice was effected upon the appellant during the entire period of disciplinary proceeding. There is a reference in the records that a registered notice came back unserved and thereafter effort was made to send notice by wireless message but there is no further material to show that such wireless message was ever served upon the appellant. 3 In view of such facts emerging from the records, we have no option but to set aside the order under appeal as well as the order of dismissal and appellate order confirming the order of dismissal. They are accordingly set aside. The enquiry report which is ex parte is also set aside. The matter is remanded back to the concerned authorities for holding a fresh enquiry after giving opportunity of hearing to the appellant. In order to avoid any further delay, the appellant is directed to appear before the disciplinary authority alongwith a copy of this order within six weeks from today. On his such appearance he will be informed of further date for holding disciplinary proceeding and the enquiry. Thereafter the enquiry should be held expeditiously and concluded within a period of three months from the date of its initiation and final decision should be taken by the disciplinary authority within six months . It will be open to the authorities to indicate in fresh charge sheet the materials which are appearing in the order of dismissal disclosing that the appellant was facing criminal proceeding during the period of his unauthorized absence. 4 It goes without saying that if the appellant does not appear within the time indicated above, and does not cooperate in the enquiry, the authorities will be at liberty to proceed ex parte in accordance with law. The petitioner would be deemed to be under continued suspension for the period that has lapsed and consequential benefits will abide by the final outcome by the disciplinary proceeding. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Nitesh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (V. Nath, J.)