IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17710 of 2008 Dr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Son of Late Dr. Braj Bansi Prasad, Retd. Assistant Director of Health Services, Government of Bihar, Patna, resident of House No.3, Patliputra Colony, P.O. and P.S. Patliputra, District Patna………………….……..Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Secretary, Health, Medicine, Education and Family Planning Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Director, Health Service, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. Departmental Enquiry Commissioner, Enquiry Officer, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. Joint Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna……………………….Respondents ---------------------- 2 26.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. By Annexure-9, after conclusion of a proceeding under the provisions of Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”), punishment has been awarded withholding of 10% pension of petitioner. The notification containing punishment is dated 09.09.2008. The proceeding under Section 43 (b) of the Rules, in fact, was initiated by Annexure-5 which is dated 11.11.2004. The order of initiation of proceeding, charge and punishment shows that petitioner was 2 proceeded against for some omission and commission committed in the year 1990-91 while he was posted as Deputy Superintendent, Rajendra Nagar Hospital, Patna. It is not disputed that the petitioner superannuated on 30.04.1995. Clearly, the entire proceeding was barred by law in view of proviso (ii) to Rule 43(b) of the Rules as it was initiated much beyond four years from the date of alleged misconduct by the petitioner. Though a counter affidavit has been filed, learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute that in view of the said provisions of Rule 43(b) of the Rules, proceeding could not be initiated as authoritatively held by successive judgments of the Division Bench of this Court. In the circumstances, punishment order as contained in Annexrue-9 as well as the order of initiation of proceeding, vide resolution dated 11.11.2004, as contained in Annexure-5, and the entire proceeding are quashed. This application is, accordingly, allowed. 3 This Court takes notice of the fact that in many cases, this Court has found that high functionaries of the Government pass mechanical orders of initiation of a proceeding after superannuation of a Government servant without noticing the provisions and limitations of Rule 43(b) of the Rules. This causes undue harassment to a retired Government employee, and multiplicity of litigation in this Court, with the only result of quashing of the same. Hence, this Court requests the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar to issue clear instructions to the subordinate functionaries of the Government in the Departments clearly indicating the scope and limitation of Rule 43 (b) of the Rules for their knowledge and with instructions to them act only in terms of the same. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna for necessary action. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)