Letters Patent Appeal No.455 OF 2007 Against the judgment and order dated 28th march, 2007 passed by learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 6577/2005. MAHENDRA MISHRA, Son of Sri Surendra Mishra, R/o Mohalla- Adampur Faris Lane,P.S.- Kotwali(Adampur),District-Bhagalpur. ------Petitioner/Appellant. . Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Deputy Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Govt.of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur. 4. The Inspector General of Police, Bhagalpur. -------Respondents/Respondents. For the Appellant : Mr. Pramod Mishra. For the Respondents : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma-S.C.27 Mr. Sanjay Mandal: A.C.to S.C. 27 ******* P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. T. MEENA KUMARI THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ******** T. Meena Kumari & Akhilesh Chandra, J.J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner- appellant and learned counsel for the Respondents. The present L.P.A. has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 6577/2005 dated 28th march, 2007. The claims of the petitioner-appellant is that he was inflicting with the punishments of breakage of service for a period from 10.06.2000 to 02.08.2000 due to unauthorized absent and it was further ordered that during the period of suspension except the 2 subsisting allowance nothing will be paid. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in a similar case relating to one Surya Nath Pandey, as against whom the same punishment was inflicted, this court has observed in C.W.J.C.No.13238/2003 disposed of one 20.09.2004 that as in this case principle of natural justice has not been complied no other action may be taken against him, but however the learned Single Judge having heard C.W.J.C.No. 6577/2005 filed by the present appellant no relief has been granted, whereas, the Learned Single Judge in the case of Surya Nath Pandey Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors., even though similar punishment has been inflicted, has observed that as the employee has retired the authority does not require to take any further action. However, taking note of the fact that the authorities have inflicted similar punishment, we are of the opinion that some discipline has to be maintained among the employees. Under the above circumstances as the punishment inflicted to the employee is very petty in nature and it is only a minor punishment and the period of suspension has been treated to be continued service, we direct that the punishment awarded to the appellant shall be maintained in view of ratio of the decision Supra. 3 With the above observation the appeal stand disposed of. Patna High Court Date : The 5th May 2011. Nitesh/N.A.F.R. ( T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)