IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2699 of 2010 1. NARESH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, JUNIOR ENGINEER, ZILA PARISHAD, MADHUBANI S/O LATE JAGDISH PARIHAR R/O STDIUM ROAD, CHITRAGUPTA NAGAR, DISTT.- MADHUBANI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MADHUBANI 3. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER CUM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILA PARISHAD, MADHUBANI 4. THE DEPUTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILA PARISHAD, MADHUBANI 5. THE DISTRICT ENGINEER ZILA PARISHAD, MADHUBANI 6. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (SUPPLY DIVISION) JHANJHARPUR SUB DIVISION, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER R.E.O. ( W ) DIVISION- JHANJHARPUR, DISTT.- MADHUBANI For the Petitioner: Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arun Kumar, Adv. For the Zila Parishad: Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Nilu Agrawal, Adv. ----------- 4/ 26/10/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Jila Parishad, Madhubani. The petitioner while working as a Junior Engineer was subjected to a departmental proceeding. The enquiry officer recommended warning. The disciplinary authority on 17.8.2009 differing with the same imposed major punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect and entry in the service book. Learned counsel for the petitioner made a short submission that warning is not a punishment and therefore there was virtually an exoneration by the enquiry officer. If the disciplinary authority proposed to - 2 - differ with the same he was required to follow the procedure of a second show cause notice indicating the reasons why on the same materials collected during enquiry he proposed to arrive at a different conclusion along with tentative reasons for the same to enable the petitioner to meet it. Failure to follow this procedure vitiates the punishment. Learned counsel for the Jila Parishad has placed the original records of the proceedings before the Court as directed earlier. From the original records it is manifest that the disciplinary authority proceeded to impose the punishment differing with the enquiry report without issuance of a second show cause notice. The order of punishment dated 17.8.2009 is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded to the disciplinary authority to proceed afresh from the stage of submission of the enquiry report as discussed above. Let the departmental proceedings be then concluded in accordance with law within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/presentation of a copy of this order. The application is allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)