IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.412 of 2008 SANJAY KUMAR . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2/ 18/11/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner was proceed against departmentally and placed under suspension. The enquiry report No.187/07 exonerated him. On 24.8.2007 re-enquiry was ordered as one witness had not appeared. The enquiry officer again on 23.9.2007 arrived at the conclusion that the charges were not proved. Paragraph-7 of the counter affidavit states:- “7. That it is humbly submitted that in enquiry report the conducting officer found the charges not proved. However, keeping in view such a misappropriation of huge amount committed by the petitioner in the said scheme. It was decided to award minor punishment of warning. Subsequently the suspension order was vacated vide notification no. 958 dated 29.10.07 mentioning therein that during the suspension period the petitioner will get only subsistence allowance.” In view of the own admission of the respondents that the charges have not been proved, the order of punishment dated – is not sustainable in its present form. It is accordingly set aside. The writ application stands allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)