IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10999 of 2009 Abhiram Trivedi son of Sri Ram Balak Trivedi, Resident of Mohalla Bibiganj, Police Station Muzaffarpur Sadar, District Muzaffarpur Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, State of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Commissioner- Cum- Secretary, Rural Development Department, State of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 4. The Under Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, State of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 5. The Collector, Vaishali at Hajipur 6. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur ----------- 02/ 31.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner at the relevant time served as Block Development Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur. He is aggrieved by the Resolution of the State Government, bearing Memo No. 4661 dated 25.5.2009, Annexure-9, whereunder after conclusion of the departmental proceeding initiated against him, he has been punished with punishment of stoppage of two increments without cumulative effect. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that Resolution of the State Government punishing the petitioner, Annexure-9 is in teeth of the provisions contained in Rule 19 of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 2005(hereinafter referred to as the Rules) inasmuch as the enquiry report dated 2.5.2008, Annexure-8 on the basis of which the Resolution of the State Government dated 25.5.2009, Annexure-9 has been passed was never served on 2 him and for failure to serve the enquiry report the order is violative of Rule 19 of the Rules. Statement to the aforesaid effect has been made in the writ petition, but as the matter is being disposed of at the admission stage without giving opportunity to the State counsel to file counter affidavit, I deem it expedient to direct the petitioner to file representation before the Commissioner- cum-Secretary of the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Respondent no.2 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order annexing a copy thereof highlighting the submission noted above that the Resolution dated 25.5.2009, Annexure-9 has been passed without serving a copy of the enquiry report dated 2.5.2008, Annexure-8 as also granting the petitioner opportunity to file his second show cause reply. The Principal Secretary of the Department shall consider the representation with reference to the documents in the file and if from the file it appears that the report of the enquiry officer dated 2.5.2008 has not been served on the petitioner and Resolution imposing punishment dated 25.5.2009, Annexure-9 has been passed without granting such opportunity to file second show cause reply then he shall take steps for recalling the Resolution of the State Government dated 25.5.2009, Annexure-9 as violative of Rule 19 of the Rules and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within one month from the date of receipt of the representation. In case he is of the view that the Resolution of the State Government dated 3 25.5.2009, Annexure-9 is not in teeth of the provisions contained in Rule 19 of the Rules then he shall be obliged to pass speaking order indicating reasons in support of his findings. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V.N. Sinha, J.)