IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1705 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5086 of 2009 With Interlocutory Application No. 7809 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1705 of 2011. ====================================================== Ram Bilash Choudhary Himanshu, S/o Late Ramautar Choudhary, R/o Village - Matihani, P.S.- Matihani, District- Begusarai ……..….. Petitioner .... .... Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Home Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. Director General - cum - Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna 3. Deputy Inspector General of Police (Wireless), Bihar, Patna 4. Assistant to Inspector General of Police (Wireless), Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondents / Respondents. ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shashi Dhar Jha, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Anju Jha, AC to AAG 6. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 4 02-12-2011 Re. Interlocutory Application No.7809 of 2011. The delay of 83 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. Letter Patent Appeal No. 1705 of 2011. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 22nd July 2011 made by the learned single Judge in above CWJC 5086 of 2009, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under Clause Patna High Court LPA No.1705 of 2011 (4) dt.02-12-2011 2 / 3 2 10 of the Letters Patent. The writ petitioner, a Sub Inspector in Bihar Police Service, was alleged to have committed financial irregularities by illegally drawing the amount of travelling allowance. On the charge established in the enquiry proceedings, by order dated 13th May 2005, the appellant was visited with punishment of reduction in rank to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector of Police until 30th September 2008. The period of suspension pending the disciplinary proceeding has been treated as such. The said order of punishment has been upheld in the departmental appeal and the memorial. Challenge to the order of punishment before the learned single Judge has failed. Therefore, this Appeal. Learned Advocate Mr. Shashidhar Jha has appeared for the appellant. The only argument he has advanced before us is in respect of the period of suspension. He has submitted that the order treating the period of suspension as such is also a punishment; unless a show cause was issued to the appellant, such an order could not have been made. He has also submitted that the impugned punishment has caused a great prejudice to the appellant inasmuch as the appellant was reinstated in the substantive post of Sub Inspector of Police a month before his retirement. Since the entire service career of the appellant was spotless, he should not have been visited with such harsh punishment. We see no substance in any of the submissions made by Mr. Shashidhar Jha. Having regard to the gravity of misconduct committed by the appellant (misappropriation of public fund), the order of reduction in rank cannot be said to be harsh. The imputation of charge made against the appellant Patna High Court LPA No.1705 of 2011 (4) dt.02-12-2011 3 / 3 3 having been proved, the order treating the period of suspension as such is a natural consequence. No case for interference is made out. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Dilip. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)