IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.37 of 2009 Ashok Kumar Mehta, son of late Amarnath Prasad, resident of Village & P.O. Onda, P.S. Benar, District Nalanda presently posted as Junior Engineer in the office of Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Work Division No.2, Hazipur, Vaishali ---- Petitioner ---- Appellant. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary, Department of Water Resources Govt. of Bihar, Sichai Bhawan, Patna-800015. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Sichai Bhawan, Patna-800015. 4. The Under Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Sichai Bhawan, Patna-800015. 5. The Superintending Engineer, Flying Squad Circle-2, Department of Water Resources, Sichai Bhawan, Patna-800015. 6. The Executive Engineer, Water-Drainage Division, Water Resources Department, Samastipur ------- Respondents ------ - ---------------- ----------------- Respondents. ------------- 9. 6.10.2009 Heard Mr. Rama Shankar Pradhan for the appellant and Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel No.21. The petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 1241 of 2002 (Ashok Kumar Mehta V. The State of Bihar & Ors.), has preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, and is aggrieved by order dated 20.11.2008, whereby the writ petition has been dismissed. It arises out of disciplinary proceedings. It appears to us that the appellant was Junior Engineer in the services of the Bihar Government. In course of time, it transpired to respondent authorities that certain materials, purchased during the time of the present appellant’s posting, had not been included in the inventory leading to disciplinary proceeding against him and other functionaries. After conclusion of 2 disciplinary proceedings, punishment of deprivation of promotion for a period of 10 years, and deduction of salary of Rs.5, 000/- per month till recovery of the full amount, was inflicted on him for causing financial loss to the Government. Aggrieved by the order, the appellant preferred the said writ petition. It appears on a perusal of the same that one of the grounds advanced by the writ petitioner was that the writ petition of similarly circumstanced Executive Engineer had been allowed by this Court, and punishment inflicted on him was quashed. On full scrutiny of the materials, the learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the petitioner had made a false statement in paragraph 28 of the writ petition in order to establish parity with the case of the Executive Engineer. The correct position is that his writ petition is still pending in this Court. It appears to us on a perusal of the materials on record and on a consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties that the learned Enquiry Officer has recorded clear finding of fact that the present appellant was a party to non-inclusion of the materials in the inventory causing wrongful loss to the State Government, and wrongful gain to himself. This being an issue of fact, this Court finds it difficult in taking a different view, particularly in a situation where the learned Single Judge has upheld the finding of the learned enquiry officer. Secondly, it appears that the principles of natural justice were observed, and the prescribed 3 procedure was followed. We are further convinced that, in view of the gravity of the proven charges, the quantum of punishment is just and proper. We do not find any merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar ,J. ) (Kishore K. Mandal,J.)