IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.3276 of 2009 ==================================================== MEENA DEVI - Petitioner/s(s) . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS- Respondent/s(s) . ==================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s: Mr. DEWENDRA NARAYAN SINGH Mr. ANURAG SAURAV For the Respondent/s: Mr. (AAG8) ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA DATE: 12-07-2011 ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA) 03. 12.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and for the State. After some arguments learned counsel for the petitioner moulding the prayer made and the relief sought submits that circumstances have substantially changed since the order of dismissal was passed. Her deceased husband had filed an Appeal, but he expired on 1.9.2007 and the appellate order has been passed after his death on 13.5.2008. The submission is that in the changed circumstances, the order of dismissal was harsh as the petitioner shall not be entitled to family pension even and therefore the petitioner desires to mould the relief and limit the submissions to the issue of quantum of punishment only. 2 Quantum of punishment is primarily the prerogative of the employer and it is not for the Court to usurp those powers except in a case where it may appear shocking to the conscience of the Court. If the petitioner represents limited to the issue of quantum of punishment, the Court expects the respondents to consider the same in accordance with law in the changed circumstances expeditiously, preferably within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The application stands disposed. P.K. ( Navin Sinha, J.)