IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9860 of 2009 SHYAM SUNDAR PRASAD CHAURASIA SON OF SRI JAMUNA PRASAD MAHTO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PANJABI MOHALLA, NAYA BAZAR LAKHISARAI IN THE DISTRICT OF LAKHISARAI----PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA-1. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 3. THE JOINT SECRETARY, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 4. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA---RESPONDENTS. For the Petitioner : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate. For the B.S.E.B. : M/s Vinay Kirti Singh, Akhileshwar Singh, Advocates. ---------- 03. 09.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna(hereinafter referred to as “the Board”). 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Chairman of the Board dated 22.5.2009, which has been communicated to him under memo No. 1325 dated 28.5.2009, Annexure-12 whereunder Chairman of the Board has considered the claim of the petitioner in the light of the directions of this Court contained in order dated 18.12.2008, Annexure-11 and rejected the same. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the order of the Chairman of the Board dated 22.5.2009 was again communicated to him under office order bearing No. 1665 dated 27.5.2009, Annexure-13 under the signature of the Joint Secretary of the Board at his place of posting i.e. Barauni Thermal Power Station and this writ application has been filed assailing the aforesaid order dated 22.5.2009 as communicated to the petitioner under Annexures- - 2 - 12 and 13. 4. It is further submitted that the order dated 22.5.2009 has been passed by the learned Chairman of the Board in purported compliance of the orders of this Court dated 18.12.2008, Annexure- 11. Close perusal whereof would indicate that thereunder this Court had directed the disciplinary authority of the petitioner to consider his submission in regard to the punishment imposed on him pursuant to a proceeding but it appears under mistaken impression the Chairman of the Board has proceeded to consider the matter and has passed order dated 22.5.2009, which has been communicated to the petitioner under Memo No. 1325 dated 28.5.2009, Annexure-12 as also communicated to him at his place of posting by the Joint Secretary of the Board under office order No. 1665 dated 27.5.2009, Annexure-13. 5. Counsel for the Board has fairly accepted the position that in stead of the disciplinary authority, namely, the Joint Secretary of the Board considering the matter in the light of the orders of this Court dated 18.12.2008, Annexure-11, the Chairman proceeded to issue second show cause notice to the petitioner differing with the inquiry report as also considered the reply and passed the final order. It is thus, obvious that the impugned orders dated 22.5.2009 as communicated to the petitioner under Memo No.1325 dated 28.5.2009, Annexure-12 and office order bearing No. 1665 dated 27.5.2009, Annexure-13 are ignoramus of the directions of this Court contained in order dated 18.12.2008, Annexure-11 and in appreciation of such fact the order of the Chairman of the Board dated - 3 - 22.5.2009 as communicated to the petitioner under Memo No.1325 dated 28.5.2009, Annexure-12 and office order bearing No. 1665 dated 27.5.2009, Annexure-13 are quashed and the matter is remitted back to the disciplinary authority of the Board, namely, the Joint Secretary to consider the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders in tune with the directions of this Court contained in order dated 18.12.2008, Annexure-11. 6. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)