IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18097 of 2009 1. DR.ARBIND KUMAR SINHA S/O SRI RAMJI PRASAD R/O VILL KUTLUPUR, P.O.BISAI BIGHA P.S.಄NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER-CUM- SECRETARY, HEALTH , MEDICAL EDUCATION AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT , VIKAS BHAWAN , PATNA 2. THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY , HEALTH , MEDICAL EDUCATION AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR , NEW SECRETARIATE , VIKAS BHAWAN , PATNA 3. THE UNDER SECRETARY, HEALTH , MEDICAL EDUCATION AND FAMILY WELFARE GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT,VIKAS BHAWAN ,PATNA 4. THE DIRECTOR , INDIGENEOUS MEDICINES, HEALTH , MEDICAL EDUCATION AND FAIMILY WELFARE GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR , NEW SECRETARIATE , VIKAS BHAWAN , PATNA 5. SRI D.N. SHARMA S/O NOT KNOWN JOINT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH , MEDICAL EDUCATION & FAMILY WELFARE,GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR , PATNA -CUM-PRESIDENT OF STATE COUNCIL OF AYURVEDIC & UNANI SYSTEMS OF MEDICINE , BIHAR , PATNA 6. BIHAR STATE COUNCIL OF AYURVEDIC & UNANI SYSTEM OF MEDICINES THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR 52-HANUMAN NAGAR, P.O.LOHIYA NAGAR,P.S.KANKARBAGH, PATNA-20, TOWN AND DISTT-PATNA 7. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL , AUDIT (LOCAL AUDIT WING) PATNA ----------- 2. 18.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is stated to be the erstwhile Chairman of the Bihar State Ayurvedic & Unani Development Council, a post which he ceased to hold in 2004. He is aggrieved by the resolutions of the council dated 29.4.2005 and 18.5.2009 in so far as it concerns him. Learned counsel for the petitioner 2 submits that the recitals contained in the impugned resolutions in so far as they relate to acts done by him during his tenure as a Chairman were not his individual acts but the acts of the council. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has been given notice to deposit the amounts in question on 9.7.2005 and has failed to do so till date. It appears from the impugned resolutions that certain audit objections have been raised with regard to acts of the petitioner as the Chairman noticed in the resolutions. The word “objections” itself denotes that certain discrepancies have been noticed. The objections may be sustainable or may not be sustainable. Be that as it may, at this stage, the Court is concerned with the only question of compliance with the principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the respondents has been unable to demonstrate from the records or from the counter affidavit that after the audit objections and the resolutions of the Council based upon the same any show cause notice was issued to the petitioner informing him of the nature of objections taken in audit with an opportunity to meet the same and then pass any orders having civil consequences against 3 the petitioner. This Court therefore only holds that the direction to the petitioner for payment by the aforesaid resolutions arising out of the audit objections at this stage is not sustainable. The Council is at liberty based on the aforesaid impugned resolutions to issue a show cause notice to the petitioner informing him of the nature of the audit objections. The petitioner shall file his reply to the same within such time as the Council may fix for the purpose. Thereafter the Council may proceed to pass final appropriate orders in accordance with law, reasoned and speaking in nature based on the audit objections raised and the reply furnished by the petitioner. Till fresh final orders are not passed by the Council in accordance with law in the manner as discussed in the present order, the directions for deposit given to the petitioner in pursuance of the audit objections shall only remain in abeyance. The writ application stands disposed with the aforesaid terms. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)