IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2534 of 2004 ====================================================== Sohawan Prasad Singh son of Late Mauji Singh, Resident of Board Colony, Quarter No. LAB/F/45 Shastrinagar, Patna-15 at present posted at Madepura, Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Madhepura. .... .... Petitioner. Versus 1. The Bihar State Electricity Board through its Secretary, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 2. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 4. The Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Bailey Road, Patna. 5. Director of Personal, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. .... .... Respondents. ====================================================== For the Petitioner : M/s. Sourendra Pandey & Braj Nandan Tiwary, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Advocate. ====================================================== PRESENT: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. HUSSAIN ORDER 12 18-07-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents- Bihar State Electricity Board and its authorities. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 13.08.2002 passed by the Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board by which the petitioner was awarded two punishments, namely (i) warning with entry into the ACR for the year 1999-2002 and (ii) payment of only Patna High Court CWJC No.2534 of 2004 (12) dt.18-07-2012 2 / 3 2 subsistence allowance for the period of suspension. The petitioner has also challenged the order of the appellate authority by which his appeal against the above mentioned order was dismissed and the said order was communicated to the petitioner vide letter no.987 dated 25.04.2003 issued by the Joint Secretary. 3. From the aforesaid letter of Joint Secretary dated 25.04.2003 (Annexure-2) it transpires that the appeal of the petitioner had been rejected by the Chairman of the Board. However, the respondents have produced a copy of the appellate order dated 18.04.2003 annexed as Annexure-A to the supplementary affidavit by which the appeal of the petitioner is said to have been dismissed. 4. From a perusal of Annexure-A it transpires that one Deepak Kumar Singh who is claimed to be the Secretary of the Board had submitted his views and suggestions that the appeal can be rejected and on that note of the Secretary there is merely a signature of the Chairman of the Board who is the appellate authority. This appears to be quite strange as the impression of this Court is that only a qualified and competent person is appointed as the Chairman of the Board who could understand his jurisdiction and duties as an appellate authority Patna High Court CWJC No.2534 of 2004 (12) dt.18-07-2012 3 / 3 3 and also as an administrative authority. If an appeal is filed according to the provisions of the Rules, it is the duty of the appellate authority to apply its independent mind to the facts and circumstances of this case on the basis of the evidence on record and the principles of law and only thereafter some decision can be made or any order can be passed. 5. This is absolutely absent in the instant case as there is merely a signature of the Chairman on the suggestions of the Secretary and the principles of law and rules of justice have been thrown to winds. Hence, the said order/action of the appellate authority is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and perverse and is accordingly quashed. 6. This writ petition is thus allowed and the Chairman of the Board is directed to consider the appeal afresh and decide it by a speaking order expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Sunil/- (S.N. Hussain, J)