IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3060 of 2003 PARMANAND SINGH, son of Sri Umeshwar Prasad Singh, resident of village Kirpaganj, P.O. Maurgama, P.S. Silaw, District Nalanda … Peititioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Director General cum Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna 3. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Magadh Division, Gaya 4. Superintendent of Police, Gaya 5. Inspector of Police, Imamganj, Gaya … Respondents. ----------- 10. 20.7.2009 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. The prayer in this writ application is for quashing an order for punishment dated 7.10.1996, the appellate order dated 10.7.1997 and the order passed by the Director General cum Inspector General of Police on memorial dated 6.1.1999, whereby and whereunder the petitioner by virtue of an order of punishment stands dismissed from the Police Department. This Court has carefully perused the materials on record and would find that the petitioner was given reasonable opportunity of hearing in course of departmental proceeding and the petitioner himself did not choose to appear before the Enquiry Officer on a number of dates. The 2 Surendra/ petitioner in fact despite service of second show cause notice did not choose to give any reply and the appellate authority and the revisional authority had also examined the grievance of the petitioner as raised in the memo of appeal/ revision as with regard to the alleged plea of prejudice on account of non-affording of opportunity in course of enquiry. Both the appellate authority and the revisional authority in the memorial have taken pains to deal each and every aspect of the issue raised by the petitioner and they have found that the petitioner deliberately did not choose to avail the opportunity extended to him in course of departmental proceeding. That being so, this Court would find no reason to interfere in an order of dismissal of service passed in the year 1996 after 13 years, especially when the petitioner himself came this Court after 7 years of the order of dismissal. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) 3