IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16909 of 2009 1. AWADHESH KUMAR TIWARI S/O SRI GAURI SHANKAR TIWARI R/O VILL.- ALAPUR, P.S.- MANJHAPUR, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER BUILDING CIRCLE, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, DARBHANGA ----------- 2. 28.01.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 30.4.2009 asking him to file his reply within one week with regard to items 1 & 3 of the enquiry report submitted by the Superintending Engineer in pursuance of a complaint made by a political busy body in the Public Grievance Cell, Darbhanga of the Chief Minister. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issues were earlier examined departmentally and a report was submitted by the Executive Engineer concerned on 18.12.2008 returning no finding against the petitioner of the nature now alleged in a subsequent report dated 25.3.2009 of the Superintending Engineer. The petitioner is being unnecessarily harassed. 2 Learned counsel for the State does not appear to be very correct in his submission from the order dated 30.4.2009 that departmental proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner. This observation is obviously confined to the materials brought on record by the petitioner. The order dated 30.4.2009 appears to be only calling for an explanation from the petitioner in light of the report dated 25.3.2009 for appropriate consideration and decision by the Respondents. It appears that the petitioner has filed his reply to the show cause notice dated 30.4.2009 in pursuance of the enquiry report dated 25.3.2009. While before this Court he relies upon earlier enquiry report dated 18.12.2008 of the Executive Engineer, his reply dated 8.6.2009 does not appear to be making any reference to the same. If the petitioner files a supplementary representation inviting the attention of the authorities to the earlier enquiry report dated 18.12.2008 as was submitted before this Court within a period of two weeks, this Court requires the respondents to adequately consider the same also in context of the enquiry report dated 25.3.2009 before taking any final decision in pursuance of the show cause notice dated 3 30.4.2009. This Court considers it necessary to so direct because the report dated 25.3.2009 is in pursuance of the allegation petition of a political busy body. The previous report dated 18.12.2008 appears to be in normal course of duties. The report dated 25.3.2009 makes no reference whatsoever to the report dated 18.12.2008. Let appropriate reasoned and speaking order be then passed by the authorities dealing with all issues as contained in the aforesaid discussion. Unless and until such fresh appropriate orders in consonance of law are passed, the question of any consequential orders on an inconclusive decision based on the notice dated 30.4.2009 including suspension etc. cannot be stated to be justified and if the petitioner so represents, the authorities are bound to reconsider such issues pending final decision of the show cause notice dated 30.4.2009. The application stands disposed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)