IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.12971 OF 2005 SURESH PRASAD VERMA, SON OF LATE RAM LAKHAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JHAMAN BIGHA, POLICE STATION MAKDUMPUR, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. AT PRESENT, ASSISTANT TEACHER, GOVERNMENT MIDDLE SCHOOL, NANOUK, POLICE STATION BUNIYADGANJ, DISTRICT GAYA ………………………………………………………………………………PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY, SECONDARY, PRIMARY AND ADULT EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, VIKASH BHAWAN, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY, PRIMARY AND ADULT EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, GAYA ……………………………………………………………………….RESPONDENTS *********** 6 07/02/2011 The petitioner has challenged Annexure-1 dated 06.11.2003 by which the District Superintendent of Education, Gaya has inflicted two punishments, namely, stoppage of one annual increment with cumulative effect and non-payment of suspension allowance during the period under which the petitioner was placed under suspension. The petitioner was the Incharge Headmaster of the Government Gauri Kanya Middle School, Manpur in the district of Gaya at the time when the charges were framed against him. At present, the petitioner has retired. Annexure-3 contains the charges against the petitioner, which are that it is said that the petitioner had withheld some part of the scholarship amount paid to the students of the School in question, by doing so the petitioner had gained personal benefit, that he was careless in his work, 2 that he had not given the entire amount released for carrying out the repair works in the school. The enquiry report contained in Annexure-8 indicates that the written statement was taken from the students who were the recipients of the scholarship. In their written statement, it has been admitted by them that the Welfare Officer has paid the entire scholarship amount and that the petitioner has not withheld any part of that amount. During the enquiry, villagers also gave their written statement, stating therein that the petitioner has been wrongly implicated in the departmental proceeding and have made a prayer that the petitioner should be posted in the school where he was teaching. The end result is that the petitioner was exonerated on the ground that the students, villagers and the District Education Committee had given in writing that the petitioner was innocent of the charges leveled against him. Contrary to the findings contained in Anneuxre-8 i.e. the enquiry report, the District Superintendent of Education, Gaya has passed the order impugned withholding one annual increment of the petitioner. This Court finds that in fact there is sufficient evidence in the enquiry report to indicate that the petitioner had not in any way indulged in any of the charges leveled against him. In fact, with respect to the 3 charge that the petitioner had not submitted the accounts or that he had not paid the entire amount released for the purposes of repair works of the school etc., it appears that no material was produced on behalf of the department to indicate that the petitioner has indulged in these activities. I, therefore, find that there is no material to support the allegations leveled against the petitioner and the District Superintendent of Education, Gaya has further committed an error by not giving any reason while differing with the findings of the Enquiry Officer, specially as the evidence is not oral rather documentary evidence filed on behalf of the students, villagers and the District Education Committee. The petitioner has raised objection with respect to the competency of the District Superintendent of Education in passing the final order of punishment, it is submitted that the District Establishment Committee is the competent authority to initiate the proceeding. I do not intend to decide this issue in view of the findings aforesaid. Accordingly, memo no. 5674 dated 06.11.2003 (Annexure-1) is hereby quashed and since the petitioner has retired, he would be entitled to the consequential reliefs which should be calculated by the District 4 Superintendent of Education, Gaya within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. This application is accordingly allowed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )