IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19731 of 2011 1. Anil Kumar Sinha S/O Late Ganesh Prasad Sinha Resident Of Mohalla - Andhari Dera Sheoganj, P.S. Town, District Bhojpur At Present Working At Assistant Engineer (Mechanical Div. Banaso Hazaribagh) Irrigation Division, Hazaribagh, State - Jharkhand Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Its Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Secretary Department Of Water Resources Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Special Secretary Department Of Water Resources Government Of Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Joint Secretary Department Of Water Resources Government Of Bihar Patna 5. The Deputy Secretary Cum Chief Vigilance Officer, Department Water Resources Government Of Bihar Patna 6. The State Of Jharkhand Through The Secretary Department Of Water Resources Government Of Jharkhand Ranchi 7. The Joint Secretary Department Of Water Resources Government Of Jharkhand, Ranchi ---------------------------------- 3. 22.12.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, the State of Bihar and the State of Jharkhand. The petitioner was punished by an order dated 11.6.2001 with censure to be entered in his ACR for the year 1987-88, ban on promotion for seven years and recovery of Rupees Seven lakhs. CWJC No. 9984 of 2002 was filed questioning the same. Disposing the writ application on 5.11.2009 the Court observed that power under Rule 55A of the Bihar Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 2005 was not absolute power. The rejection of the cause shown by a non speaking order was unsustainable. The order was set aside and the matter remanded to pass fresh orders in accordance with law. A fresh order has now been passed on 10.11.2010 by the Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department. 2 Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Court in CWJC No. 9984 of 2002 had directed consideration of his replies dated 5.1.1994, 5.5.1994 and 5.1.1996.The impugned order does not make any reference to the defence furnished in the three replies. On the contrary it refers to Annexures 2, 4 & 5 of the writ application. It is therefore not in accordance with the direction of the Court displaying full application of mind to the defence furnished. Counsel for the State opposing the application submits that the fresh order refers to Annexures 2, 4 and 5 of the writ application. These Annexures are all defence of the petitioner dated 5.1.1994, 5.5.1994 and 5.1.1996. The language in the order and the nomenclature may not be appropriate, but in sum and substance it complies the order of the Court. The petitioner is not in a position to deny that Annexures 2, 4 & 5 to CWJC No. 9984 of 2002 were his defence dated 5.1.1994, 5.5.1994 and 5.1.1996. The Court has perused the impugned order dated 10.11.2010. Keeping in mind the minor nature of punishment imposed the subsequent reduction for denial of promotion from seven to five years and the consideration reflected the Court is not persuaded to interfere with the impugned order. The writ application is dismissed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)