IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7341 of 2006 KEDAR NATH SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 04 25.08.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of punishment imposed upon him by the respondent Managing Director which is contained in Annexure-1 to the writ application. The punishments are stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect and no payment of salary for the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance. Petitioner’s challenge to this order is based on the ground that in the enquiry held against him, the enquiry officer did not find him guilty on any of the charges alleged. In support of the above contention he has brought on record the enquiry report contained in Annexure-2. He submits that in absence of any guilt having been recorded by the enquiry officer there was no occasion for the respondents to impose any kind of punishment even though minor or major. In the counter affidavit which has been filed on behalf of respondents a stand has been taken that though the petitioner has not been found guilty in the enquiry report but he has not been totally 2 exonerated and this is the reason the minor punishment came to be imposed against him. But the stand taken by the respondents is not borne out from the records. There are categorical findings recorded by the enquiry officer exonerating the petitioner of all the four sets of charges which were brought against him. If the disciplinary authorities in their wisdom wanted to disagree with the conclusion reached in the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority had liberty to issue a notice of disagreement on the material available but in absence of stand of a kind taken by him he does have liberty to impose any kind of punishment on the petitioner based on the enquiry report. The Court is of the opinion that the challenge thrown to the petition contained in Annexure-1, dated 27.02.2006 is correct and the same requires interference. Annexure -1, dated 27.02.2006 is quashed and the writ application stands allowed. Sym/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)