IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12434 of 2002 DAMODAR PATHAK Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 03 19.3.2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on identical charges one Dinesh was proceeded departmentally. Specific pleading has been made in paragraphs 18 to 21 that after enquiry the aforesaid Dinesh has been visited with the punishment that the period of his suspension shall be treated as one of Earned Leave. As a result, he has received his entire salary for the period of suspension. No other punishment has been imposed on him. On common allegations the petitioner has been visited with the punishment of stoppage of two increments with no cumulative effect and that for the period of suspension nothing except subsistence allowance would be paid. The counter affidavit of the respondents dealing with the aforesaid paragraphs of the writ petition at paragraph-25 is non committal with regard to any distinction between the case of the petitioner and the aforesaid Dinesh. In a departmental proceeding, different 2 punishment can be passed against different delinquent depending on the nature of charges against them and the conclusions that may be recorded individually, but if there is any uniformity the respondents shall have to justify different punishments to the two. This Court on the facts of the present case finds no reason to interfere with the imposition of punishment upon the petitioner since he has been unable to demonstrate any illegality in the proceeding. But insofar as, quantum of punishment is concerned, this Court finds justification in the plea of the petitioner of discrimination vis-à-vis Dinesh which has not been answered, either in the appellate order or in the counter affidavit. The matter is, therefore, remanded to the respondents authorities to re-consider the issue of quantum of punishment vis-à-vis Dinesh. Learned counsel for the State points out that no issue of discrimination was raised in the appeal as stated in para 24 of the counter affidavit. This application is disposed off with the observation that the respondents are obliged to re- consider the quantum of punishment in light of that given to Dinesh and pass appropriate orders in 3 accordance with law within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)