IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12943 of 2009 Urmila Sharma @ Urmila Singh Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16757 of 2009 Chandrashekhar Prasad Singh Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors 5/ 16/08/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State in both the writ applications. The question of law for consideration in both the cases is common on the justifiability of a departmental proceeding under Rule-43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules for an event more than four years prior to the date of charge. In both the cases the respondents had relied upon a Bench decision of this Court reported in 2003(1) P.L.J.R. 172 (Ashok Kumar Mishra versus State of Bihar). In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in 1995 (2) P.L.J.R. 51 (S.C.) (State of Bihar versus Md. Idrish Ansari) sought to be distinguished in the case of Ashok Kumar Mishra (supra), the matter was referred to a Division Bench. The Division Bench by order dated 10.5.2010 has ruled that Ashok Kumar Mishra (supra) does not lay down the correct law insofar as the interpretation of Rule-43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules 2 is concerned. The entire edifice of the prosecution against the petitioners was the case of Ashok Kumar Mishra (supra). The facts not being in dispute that the charge related to an event more than four years prior to the date of the charge, in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Division Bench, the applications have to be allowed. The proceedings against the petitioners under Rule-43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules are therefore quashed. The applications are allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)