IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 12155 of 2003 Kritya Nand Sharma, aged about 45 years, s/o late Singheshwar Singh, Resident of Village - Maghgain, Police Station - Sangrampur, District- Munger - Petitioner Versus 1) The Bihar State Road Transport Corporation through its Administrator, ‘Pariwahan Bhawan’, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 2) The Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, ‘Pariwahan Bhawan’, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 3) The Chief of Administration, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, ‘Pariwahan Bhawan’, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 4) The Chief Accounts Officer, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, ‘Pariwahan Bhawan’, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 5) The Divisional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur 6) The Depot Superintendent, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Bhagalpur Depot, Bhagalpur - Respondents ----------- 5 23.06.2009 The petitioner was a Conductor in a bus run by the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation. On the eventful day beyond the route allocated, the bus met with an accident. The driver and the petitioner abandoned the bus and gave information thereof only after two days. In the meantime, the bus being abandoned, its battery was stolen. A departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner whose defence was that having completed the scheduled journey, he was taken ill and was hospitalized. In support thereof, certificate from a doctor has been filed. He, thus, submits that he was unaware of the accident and being sick could not take action in this regard. This has been disbelieved by the Enquiry Officer, the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority. He has been dismissed from service. Earlier, against the order of the Disciplinary Authority that was the Managing Director of the Corporation, an appeal lays to the 2 Chairman. By the time appeal was taken up, the post of Chairman and Managing Director were amalgamated. The appeal was heard by the Chairman who also happened to be the Managing Director who had passed the order and the appeal was dismissed. This brought the petitioner to this Court. This Court set aside the appellate order holding that a person cannot sit in appeal over his own order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration as by then the Chairman-cum-Managing Director had changed. The new Chairman now has dismissed his appeal which is being challenged. On behalf of petitioner, it is submitted that the appeal as per Rules have to be heard by the Chairman and not by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director. I am not persuaded to accept this. Chairman-cum-Managing Director presupposes the post of Chairman and that is what is the requirement. There is no legal infirmity in this regard. It is then submitted that the petitioner has submitted certificate of the doctor for his absence. That is a question of fact that has been disbelieved by the Enquiry Officer, Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority. It is a question of fact concluded. This Court is not sitting in appeal over those findings. That finding cannot be interfered. This writ petition merits no consideration and is dismissed accordingly. However, it goes without saying that notwithstanding the dismissal of the petitioner, if petitioner has any outstanding claim against the Corporation, the petitioner would make a representation to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director within one month from today 3 who would consider the same and after examining it pass appropriate speaking order in this regard and communicate the same to the petitioner within three months. In case any payment is found due, the same would also be paid within the said period alongwith the said order. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)