IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3858 of 2007 Sacchidanand Singh Son of Late Ramghita Singh, resident of Village- Muzouma, P.S. – Dariyapur, District- Saran … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Secretary cum Commissioner Home Police, Bihar, Patna 3. The Divisional Commissioner, Saran 4. The District Magistrate, Saran 5. The Superintendent of Police, Saran 6. The Officer Incharge, P.S. Dariyapur, Saran 7. The Circle Officer, Dariyapur, Saran 8. Sri T.P. Yadav, the then Officer Incharge, Dariyapur P.S., Saran .. .. Respondents ---------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajatshatru, Advocate For the State :Mr. Shankar Kumar Thakur, A.C. to S.C.-4 02/ 26.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. At the relevant time, petitioner served as Chaukidar in Dariyapur Police Station within the district of Saran. He has filed this writ petition questioning the validity of the order, bearing Memo No. 844 dated 1.8.2006, Annexure-1 passed by the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra whereunder he has been imposed punishment of censure, no salary for the period of absence with further direction to take the period of absence for grant of pension to the petitioner. Aforesaid order has been passed in 2 consideration of the findings recorded against the petitioner in the enquiry report, bearing letter No. 1162/ C dated 13.5.2006, copy whereof was not given to the petitioner to refute the findings recorded therein. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he fell ill on 4.7.2001 and remained absent from the place of his posting i.e. Dariyapur P.S. until 10.7.2001 with due intimation to the officer-in-charge about his illness on 4.7.2001 itself. The officer-in-charge, however, did not accept his joining on 11.7.2001 when petitioner approached to join his duties. In this connection, petitioner invited the attention of all concerned and submitted that in the attendance register, Annexure-13, incorrect endorsement has been made that he has been placed under suspension and on that basis, he was not allowed to serve from 11.7.2001 until 18.5.2006, except for few months from February, 2003 to July 2003, which fact was enquired into by succeeding officer-in-charge, Sri Vijay Kumar from the earlier officer-in-charge, Sri Tapeshwar Prasad Yadav under 3 letter No. DR-123/03 dated 25.3.2003, Annexure-8, in response whereto Sri Tapeshwar Prasad Yadav under letter dated 27.3.2003, Annexure-9 stated that petitioner was not placed under suspension and incorrect endorsement has been made in the attendance register, Annexure-13. Sri Tapeshwar Prasad Yadav in his letter dated 27.3.2003, Annexure-9 further stated that petitioner’s presence be marked in the attendance register for the said period. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in response to the charge sheet, Annexure-10, petitioner filed his show cause reply dated 8.5.2006, Annexure-11 in which aforesaid facts have been mentioned but ignoring such fact, the Enquiry Officer submitted enquiry report dated 13.5.2006, copy whereof was not served on the petitioner so as to enable the petitioner to impress upon the Disciplinary Authority i.e. the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra that the finding that petitioner remained absent for the period between 3.7.2001 – 18.5.2006 is wholly incorrect. 4. State- respondents have filed counter 4 affidavit but have not disputed the submission of the petitioner that he was not served with the enquiry report dated 13.5.2006 so as to enable him to dislodge the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer that he remained absent from his duties during the aforesaid period. It is also submitted that the Enquiry officer was required to have considered the matter in the light of the letter of the then Officer-in-charge, Sri Tapeshwar Prasad Yadav dated 27.3.2003, Annexure- 9 in which Sri Yadav has candidly accepted that petitioner was neither placed under suspension nor he remained absent from the police station after 11.7.2001 and suggested that his attendance for the said period be marked. 5. From the discussion made above, it is evident that petitioner was neither served with the enquiry report dated 13.5.2006 nor was given any opportunity to dislodge the findings recorded therein which is the basis of passing of the impugned order dated 1.8.2006, Annexure-1, which is, accordingly, quashed with direction to the Disciplinary Authority i.e. the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra to furnish 5 the copy of the enquiry report dated 13.5.2006 to the petitioner with opportunity to him to file his reply. The show cause reply received from the petitioner be considered in the light of the averments made in the letter of Sri Tapeshwar Prasad Yadav dated 27.3.2003, Annexure-9 in accordance with law. In compliance of the order of the High Court, the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra should issue second show cause notice annexing a copy of the enquiry report dated 13.5.2006 as early as possible, in any case within one month from today and consider the show cause reply received from the petitioner within two months and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 6. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)