IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11384 of 2011 Jawahar Pandit S/O Late Kheshri Pandit R/O Village-Khesraha,PS- Vidyapati Nagar,District-Samastipur,At Present Posted And Working As Junior Engineer, Water Ways Division, Water Resources Department ,Muzaffarpur. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Engineer-in-Chief ,Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Under Secretary, Water Resources Department Government of Bihar, Patna 6. The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department Government of Bihar, Birpur, District-Supaul 7. The Executive Engineer, Water Ways Division Muzaffarpur. 8. Sub Divisional Officer, Water Discharge Sub-Division Murliganj, Camp Khajurdeva, Distt-Saharsa. 9. Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Triveniganj, Supaul, Distt- Supaul. ----------- 02. 21.9.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has many a submission to make with regard to the order of punishment passed against him contained in Annexure-3 dated 2.6.2009. He filed a detailed memo of appeal on the various aspects before the appellate authority. The appellate authority has upheld the order of punishment by virtue of order dated 5.4.2011 contained in Annexure-12. Both orders are under challenge. One aspect, however, which is glaring and stands established from the evidence on record that the communication made with the petitioner by the appellate authority with regard to his appeal 2 was initially misdirected, not served and by the time it was served, time for appearing and presenting his case was well over. The appellate authority in a mechanical fashion held that since the appellant i.e. the petitioner had nothing to offer by way of explanation in appeal, the order of punishment is upheld. Not only the order of appeal is a cryptic order, it does not indicate application of mind but even the petitioner was pre-empted or prevented on presenting his case before the appellate authority and right of appeal being a substantive right where the basic factual and legal grounds are laid, this Court has no hesitation in quashing the order of the appellate authority contained in Annexure-12, with a direction that petitioner will be given opportunity to present his case and after hearing the matter appropriate order would be required to be passed taking into consideration the various grounds urged by him. The Court expects an early adjudication of the matter provided petitioner co-operates preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order. Writ is allowed with a direction that the recovery aspect will remain in abeyance now till the appellate authority takes a decision in terms of the direction of the Court. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)