IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.509 of 2001 MADAN GOPAL PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3. 16.5.2008. Heard counsel for the parties. Though in the departmental enquiry there was no finding arrived at against the petitioner with regard to embezzlement of money of the Bank but it is also a fact that the petitioner was the Accounts Officer and he had certain role and responsibility in keeping the affairs of the Bank under close scrutiny of accounts. Because of the said finding arrived at in the departmental enquiry no severe action was taken against him but the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, based on the recommendation of the enquiry officer in his, wisdom decided to impose punishment of censure and withholding of salary for the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance. This order has been upheld by the Secretary, Department of Cooperative, Government of Bihar also. The Secretary in his detailed order has recorded his reasons why the petitioner could not be allowed to go scot free and not take responsibility at all even though he was the Accountant and he had a responsibility to keep an eye on the accounts of the Bank. It is not a case where the petitioner has been totally absolved of his responsibility though it could be a case of fixing responsibility of a lower kind. There is another aspect, which is kept in mind is that the petitioner has not explained why he 2 chose to challenge the order of punishment upheld by the Secretary in Annexure-2 after more than six years. This Court does not find any merit in this writ application in the above facts and circumstances. This writ application is accordingly dismissed. Pawan/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)