IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15760 of 2001 DINDAYAL SINGH Versus .1. The State of Bihar 2. The District Officer ( Collector), Rohtas 3. The Departmental Proceeding Conducting Officer-Cum- Land Acquisition Officer,Rohtas at Sasaram 4. The Block Development Officer, Chenare, District Rohtas -------------- 4. 1-10-2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and perused the materials on record including the impugned order dated 17-9-2001 ( Annexure-6 ) whereby agreeing with the findings given by the Enquiry Officer in respect of charge nos.1 and 3 the competent authority, the District Magistrate, Rohtas has awarded punishment of dismissal from service to the petitioner. It has been submitted that petitioner had dealt with the two projects in question only in the capacity of accounts clerk posted in the office of the Block Development Officer, Chenari whereas the authority to issue cheque and authorize payment was vested in the Block Development Officer and the technical compliance in respect of validity of the work was to be checked by the concerned engineer. Prima facie, the aforesaid submission appears attractive but on careful perusal of charge nos. 1 and 3 available in annexure-1 it is found that the charges relate to irregularities which had to be dealt in the concerned file and in the facts of the case it cannot be said that the charges are unrelated to the work of the petitioner. The enquiry appears to have been conducted fairly, in accordance with rules and punishment has been awarded after giving opportunity of show cause to the petitioner. - 2 - Naresh In the facts and circumstances of the case, this court finds no good reason to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. ( Shiva Kirti Singh,J)