IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2956 of 2007 DR.VEENA PANDEY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 7/ 30/03/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The claim in this writ application is for regularization of certain periods of leave, certain periods of waiting for posting and certain periods of medical leave. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. What emerges is that for certain periods for which relief is claimed, departmental proceedings were initiated on 30.6.2005 and enquiry report has been submitted. In pursuance thereof a second show-cause notice of the proposed punishment has been given to the petitioner. The counter affidavit states that with regard to certain other periods for which relief has been prayed for in the writ application, a fresh departmental proceeding has been started. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to persuade this Court that this fresh departmental 2 proceeding also takes within its ambit the period for which the petitioner was waiting for posting and which has wrongly been classified as a period of unauthorized absence. Once departmental proceedings have commenced, the petitioner shall have the privilege of raising all objections in the departmental proceedings itself, which the authorities are required to consider and decide in accordance with law. This Court, therefore, directs that insofar as the departmental proceeding commenced on 30.6.2005 is concerned, and in respect of which a second show cause has been issued to the petitioner, final orders be passed thereupon within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the concerned respondent. Insofar as the fresh departmental proceeding stated in the counter affidavit to have been commenced, this Court directs that the same must be concluded within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The time period shall apply provided the petitioner herself co-operates. In the event of non- cooperation by the petitioner, the respondents shall 3 be at liberty to proceed ex parte, if necessary, but only after recording the reasons for their satisfaction of the non-cooperation by the petitioner to justify the ex parte proceeding. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)