IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4166 of 1998 Ghanshyam Das son of late Shri Satya Narain Das, resident of village- Temtha, P.S. Parbatta, District- Khagaria at present Ex. D. P. C. (Drill passed constable) to 13/43 District Armed Police Force- Munger. –petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Director General and Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 3. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Munger. 4. Superintendent of Police, Munger. --- Respondents. ---------------------------------- 5 15.12.2011 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned Counsel for the State. The writ petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 6.4.1997 contained in memo no. 853/1997 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Munger by which the petitioner has been removed from service with immediate effect as well as appellate order of the D.I.G., Munger as contained in Memo No. 2782 dated 1.12.1997. It is also submitted that the memorial filed by the petitioner has also since been rejected. The petitioner was proceeded against departmentally due to an incident happened on 06.3.1996 and it is alleged that he used provocative language before the Superintendent of Police, Munger and he tried to create nuisance by interfering in the official duty of the Superintendent of Police. Memo of charges was served upon him and the 2 matter was enquired into and the enquiry officer held the petitioner to be guilty of the charges which were proved. On the basis of an enquiry report the order of punishment dated 6.4.1997 came to be passed. The punishment of dismissal was affirmed in Appeal by order dated 11.12.1997. Learned counsel for the petitioner has mainly based his argument on the ground that the punishment meted to the petitioner was dis-proportionate to the charges levelled against him. In fact, to cut short the matter , Learned Counsel has produced order dated 09.9.2004 passed in CWJC No. 4858 of 1999 in the case of Anil Kumar Singh Vrs. State of Bihar and others by which a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has set-aside the orders and remanded the matter to the authorities concerned to pass necessary orders in light of the provisions as laid down in Rule 826 of the Police Manual after holding the order of the dismissal dis-proportionate to the guilt. Learned counsel submits that in the present case also the disciplinary authority should have acted in accordance with Rule 826 of the Police Manual which provides guidelines for awarding punishment. Learned counsel submits that the said Anil Kumar 3 Singh was identically situated to the petitioner in as much as he was also proceeded against for the same very incident and on the same very charges. Learned counsel for the State does not dispute this position. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case this Court is also inclined to agree with the reasoning given and the view taken by this Court in CWJC No. 4858 of 1999 in order dated 09.9.2004. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed and the order impugned dated 06.4. 1997 as well as the appellate order dated 11.12.1997 are set-aside and the matter is remanded to the authority concerned to pass necessary order in accordance with law keeping in mind Rule 826 of the Bihar Police Manual. A copy of the order dated 09.9.2004 passed in CWJC No. 4858/1999 which has been produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is being kept on record. Sudha (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)