IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5092 of 2007 Awadh Bihari Lal Son of Late Chitra Narayan Lal, Resident of At & P.O. Ratanpur, P.S. Kamtaul, District Darbhanga. Presently Circle Officer, Barihiya, Lakhisarai … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Land Reforms Deptt. Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The Commissioner, Munger Range, Munger 5. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi 6. The Additional Collector, Sitamarhi 7. The Treasury Officer, Sitamarhi … Respondents ---------------------------------- 02/ 24.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. At the time of filing of the writ petition, petitioner served as Circle Officer, Barhaiya, Lakhisarai. He filed this writ petition praying, inter alia, to direct the authorities to conclude the departmental proceeding initiated against him for acts of omission and commission, while he served as Circle Officer, Sonbarsa in Sitamarhi district at an early date in view of his impending retirement. During the pendency of the writ petition, petitioner also superannuated. After superannuation of the 2 petitioner, punishment order, bearing Memo No. 7377 dated 30.7.2010, Annexure-13 has been passed and by resorting to Rule 43(b) of Pension Rules his pension has been reduced by 10% of the amount payable. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from the enquiry report dated 26.11.2008, Annexure-14, it will appear that petitioner alone was not responsible for the delay in payment of the retiral dues of Sri Yogendra Prasad Bhagat, Revenue Karamchari. In this connection, it is pointed out that service book, on the basis of which retiral dues of Sri Bhagat was to be finalized, was not available in the Circle Office, Sonbarsa and for tracing the service book of Sri Bhagat, petitioner wrote to the Additional Collector and the delay in tracing the service book of Sri Bhagat was caused at the level of the Additional Collector. It is submitted in the aforesaid background that punishment of reduction of pension by 10% is excessive and this Court may direct the authorities to reduce the same by 5% of the amount payable to the petitioner. 3 4. Aforesaid prayer is being refuted by the counsel for the State, who submits that for causing delay in tracing the service book of Sri Bhagat, petitioner may not be wholly responsible but the other charge levelled against him is that he filed counter affidavit in the High Court making incorrect statement which is solely attributed to the petitioner and if this Court takes any lenient view in the matter, this Court may be encouraging the officer who is causing delay in making payment of the retiral dues to other service holder forcing the service holder to file writ petition. 5. I see substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the State and see no merit in the writ petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed, however, with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal, if so advised. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)