IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8631 of 2009 SHANKAR RAM, S/O LATE BHIKHAR RAM,RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MATH BANWARI, P.S.- PIPRAKOTHI, DISTRICT – EAST CHAMPARAN, MOTIHARI. ... ... PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SINCHAI BHAWAN, PATNA. 2. THE JOINT SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SINCHAI BHAWAN, PATNA. 3. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SINCHAI BHAWAN, PATNA. 4. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF,(NORTH) WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SINCHAI BHAWAN,PATNA. ... ... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2. 25.7.2009. Petitioner is aggrieved by the resolution of the State Government dated 15.9.2006 (Annexure-1) where under enquiry proceedings were initiated against him and the memo of charge served on the petitioner. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from perusal of the memo of charge, it would appear that while framing charge, the authorities have held the petitioner guilty and in such situation, the resolution initiating the departmental proceeding (Annexure-1) as also the further notification of the State Government converting the departmental proceeding into proceeding under Rule 43(b) of Bihar Pension Rules bearing Memo No.334 dated 30.4.2008 - 2 - (Annexure-2) be quashed on the ground that while framing charge, authorities having considered the explanation filed by the petitioner ought not to have held the petitioner prima facie guilty of the charges as explanation sought for from the Executive and Superintending Engineer, concerning the same charges were accepted but petitioner’s explanation was rejected and charges framed. It is further submitted that the charges being administrative in nature, this Court should intervene in the matter even at this stage as after initiation of the proceeding under resolution dated 15.9.2006, petitioner superannuated with effect from 31.7.2007. I regret not to accept the aforesaid submissions and direct the petitioner to file his written defence before the Enquiry Officer within one month from today, the Enquiry Officer is directed to proceed with the enquiry and conclude the same as early as possible in any case within four months from the date of receipt of the written defence along with a copy of this order. While considering the written defence of the - 3 - N.H./ petitioner, the Enquiry Officer should take into account the submission noted above that the charges are administrative in nature and while framing the charges, the authorities have held him prima facie guilty of the matter, which is contrary to the decision of the Administrative Reforms Department of the State Government bearing No.4512 dated 12th March,1979 (Annexure-9). It goes without saying that if the petitioner does not cooperate in the disposal of the enquiry proceeding within the time indicated by this Court, then it shall be open to the Enquiry Officer to proceed ex-parte. It shall also be open to the petitioner to approach this Court for quashing the charges if the enquiry is not concluded within the time granted by this Court and lack of progress in the enquiry is not attributed to the petitioner. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. ( V.N. Sinha,J.) - 4 -