IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8707 of 2009 Sidheshwar Prasad Singh, Son of Late Jay Narayan Singh, Resident of Village-Basudewa, P.S.-Ram Krishna Dudhiyahi, District-Muzaffarpur, Presently post as Assistant Store Keeper, Divisional Store Khagaria. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The Bihar State Electricity Board through its Secretary, having office at Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 2. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, having office at Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, having office at Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 4. The Joint Secretary (General Administration Department), Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, having office at Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 5. The Personnel Director, General Administration Department, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, having office at Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 6. The Director, Departmental Proceeding, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, having office at Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 7. The Deputy Personnel Director, General Administration Department, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, Bailey Road, Patna. -Respondents. ----------- 02 28.07.2009 The petitioner who is an employee of Bihar State Electricity Board and was proceeded against. The charges were basically with regard to alleged loss of various equipments which were kept in the store. Petitioner was found guilty. After due enquiry in which he participated and had opportunity to examine the witnesses as well. He preferred appeal before the Chairman of the Board. The appeal was summarily dismissed. This Court then set aside the appellate order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration and that is now the matter has come to this Court. The Chairman considering the aspect has passed a fresh order in appeal. The Chairman had examined the facts and upheld the order but while doing so he has ordered that recovery shall continue till amount defalcated is fully recovered. In the order of - 2 - the Chairman itself it is noted that another person Shri Pulkit Singh was also found guilty for the same goods being defalcated, against him also order of recovery has been passed. Petitioner submits that the same amount cannot be recovered twice from two persons. There ought to have been an order of apportioning the liabilities. This Court does not find any merit in various contentions raised by the petitioner, but so far as apportionment of amount to be recovered is concerned, the matter is remanded back to the Chairman of the Board for fresh consideration. He would look into the fact of desirability of proceedings against other persons also if facts justify such action and then divide the total amount to be recovered amongst all persons responsible for the said. With these observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)