Brajesh Kumar VikalversusThe State of Bihar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3990 of 2024
     ======================================================
     Brajesh Kumar Vikal S/o R.K. Mishra, Resident of Mahesh Nagar, Road No.
     02, Patliputra, Kehsri Nagar, Patna, P.O. and P.S.-Patliputra, District-Patna.

                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                      Versus
1.   The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Information and Public Relation
     Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.   The Director, Information and Public Relation Department, Government of
     Bihar, Patna.
3.   The Accountant General, Government of Bihar, Patna.

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr.Sanjeev Kr. Mishra, Sr. Adv.
                                     Mr.Sourav Suman, Adv.
                                     Ms.Pragati Patra, Adv.
     For the Respondent/s    :       Mr.Nadim Sheraj, GP5
                                     Mr.Shailesh Kumar, AC to GP5
                                     Dr. Anand Kumar, Adv.
                                     Ms. Vijayta Kumari, Adv.
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
     ORAL JUDGMENT
      Date : 12-02-2026

                    Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Mishra, Learned Senior

      Counsel with Mr. Sourav Suman, Advocate for the petitioner

      and Learned Counsel for the State.

                    2. The present writ petition has been filed with the

      following reliefs:-

                                   (i) To issue appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/
                       direction(s) in the nature of Certiorari setting aside the
                       entire departmental proceeding initiated vide Memo No.
                       252 dated 23.11.2021 (as contained Annexure- P/6) against
                       the petitioner as the same is perverse and based on no
                       evidence.
                                   (ii) To issue appropriate writ(s)/   order(s)/
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                           2/13




                         direction(s) in the nature of Certiorari quashing and setting
                         aside the order dated 23.09.2022 passed vide letter no.
                         1291    (as    contained     in   Annexure-   P/19)   whereby,
                         punishment of withholding of two increments with non-
                         cumulative effect has been imposed on the petitioner and
                         the punishment order passed vide letter no. 1273 dated
                         25.08.2023 rejecting the Review application
                         filed the petitioner without application of mind in a
                         mechanical manner. (Annexure- P/21)
                                       (iii) To issue an appropriate writ/order/
                         direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the
                         Respondent Authorities to pay all consequential benefits to
                         the petitioner including arrears of salary after taking into
                         consideration all the promotions, increments and pay
                         revisions applicable to the petitioner along with interest
                         thereupon.
                     3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits

         that the petitioner was appointed as Bihar Information Officer in

         the year 2009 and discharging his duty to the best of his abilities

         and to the satisfaction of all his superiors. He further submits

         that this matter is relating to the year 2016-17, while the

         petitioner was then posted as In-charge Assistant Director

         (Advertisement Release) Head Quarter, Information and Public

         Relation Department, Patna. He further submits that relating to

         the work done in 2016-17, explanation was sought from the

         petitioner on 09.01.2018, in response thereof, the petitioner

         replied on 18.01.2018, requesting them to provide the relevant

         documents and again on 10.03.2018, he has also submitted other
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                           3/13




         relevant documents in support of his innocence. He further

         submits that on 26.04.2018 vide letter No.363, the petitioner had

         submitted his detail representation to the concerned authority.

                     4. Learned Senior counsel further submits that the

         matter was relating to the advertisement on the occasion of

         Independence day of the year 2016-17. He further submits that

         every year, the advertisement used to come from the

         Government on the occasion of Independence day and a design

         was prepared by the then empanel agency and direction was

         made by the High Officials and after verbal approval,

         publication of the said advertisement was made. He further

         submits that publication was given in 39 newspapers/magazines

         including approved as well as non-approved. He further submits

         that after courts’ approval, design was made by the High

         Officials dated 13.08.2016 for publication through Whatsapp,

         but due to Holiday on 13.08.2016 (Saturday) and 14.08.2016

         (Sunday) and 15.08.2016 (Monday), High Officials were

         conveyed about publication and expenses incurred on the same

         and guidance was obtained through Telephone and Whatsapp in

         the interest of work as it is necessary to publish it on

         15.08.2016. In result, the said advertisement was timely

         published on 15.08.2016, and object of the advertisement was
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                           4/13




         fulfilled.

                      5. Learned Senior counsel further submits that on

         17.08.2016, file was presented by the office for the post-facto

         approval from the competent authority. It was forwarded to the

         Director on 18.08.2016 for post-facto identical approval and

         upon approval at the level of the Director, it was forwarded to

         the Principal Secretary, but on 03.07.2019, the Information and

         Public Relation Department, Government of Bihar, issued a

         letter to submit explanation within one week. Subsequently, the

         said department dated 23.11.2021, initiated the departmental

         proceeding under Rule 14 & 17 of the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005

         after a lapse of about two and a half years along with the

         Prapatra-Ka has been issued. He further submits that the said

         Prapatra-Ka is defective one as name of witnesses were not

         entered.

                      6. Learned Senior counsel further submits that the

         petitioner has filed his representation before the Secretary,

         Information and Public Relation Department, Government of

         Bihar on 01.12.2021 that due process has not been followed for

         initiation of the departmental proceeding. Upon initiation of the

         departmental proceeding, the matter was referred before the

         Inquiry Officer where the petitioner appeared and in the Inquiry
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                           5/13




         report, he has been held guilty. Subsequently, a show-cause

         notice was issued against him. The petitioner had responded and

         filed his reply to the second show-cause in which he has taken

         categorical defence by way of attaching a Circular/ Resolution

         of the Government i.e., second show-cause (Annexure-P/18)

         Resolution No.3887 dated 19.06.2008 in which it was indicated

         that the delay of placing a file to next person, shall not be more

         than 3 days. He further submits that 13.08.2016 (Saturday),

         14.08.2016 (Sunday) and 15.08.2016 (Monday) were holidays

         and petitioner performed his work diligently even on holiday,

         but 16.08.2016 is the opening day in which he has placed his

         file to the superior i.e., before his Director on 17.08.2016 and

         before appropriate authority, this file was placed on 19.08.2016.

         Therefore, the said allegation that the file was not placed for

         post-facto sanction for three days, is wrong.

                     7. Learned Senior counsel further submits that the

         final order is Annexure-P/19, contained in Memo No.205 dated

         23.09.2022, by which imposition of punishment of two

         increments with non-cumulative effect has been imposed upon

         him. He further submits that admittedly, the punishment is

         minor in nature and imposing minor punishment has been

         guided under Rule 19 of the CCA Rules, 2005. He categorically
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                           6/13




         mentioned that under Rule 9(1)(d) of the CCA, Rules, 2005, it is

         the legislative direction that at the time of passing order for

         imposing minor penalty recording a finding on each imputation

         of misconduct and misbehavior has to be made. Here in the

         present case, in response of his representation, only one line

         observation has come in the final order i.e., “Delinquent Officer

         has not submitted any new fact” and thereafter, punishment has

         been imposed. He further submits that since the order has not

         been passed in accordance with law and in gross violation of

         Rule 19(1)(d) of CCA Rules, 2005, therefore, the said orders

         passed by the authority are fit to be set aside.

                     8. Learned Senior counsel further submits that when

         the original order itself is bad in law, therefore, the subsequent

         appellate order is also bad in law because this aspect has not

         been taken into consideration. Another aspect on which learned

         senior counsel put his emphasis that the matter is of the year

         2015-16, charge-memo was framed in the year 2021,

         punishment has been concluded in the year 2022 in appeal and

         in the writ petition, final hearing is going in 2026. He further

         submits that due to long pendency of the case, the petitioner has

         already suffered a lot and his entire career has been disturbed

         and having long consequences in his career particularly for not
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                           7/13




         his fault and only due to ignorance of the Circular of the

         Government, which he has attached with his show-cause about

         which the Disciplinary Authority has said only one line

         statement that no new fact has come. He further submits that

         any Government Officer is bound by the Circular/ Resolution of

         the Government. Here in the present case, the own Circular has

         been completely ignored, therefore, inspite of remanding the

         matter, the litigation may be ended.

                     9. In conclusion, Senior counsel submits that the writ

         petition may be allowed and benefits, which was stopped in

         pursuant to the punishment order, be directed to be granted

         within a fixed period of time.

                     10. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently

         opposes the argument on behalf of the petitioner and submits

         that there is no defect in the charge-memo. It is a case in which

         there is no need of witness and it is due to this reason, in the

         witness column, zero has been shown. He further submits that

         the violation of law is a part of the departmental proceeding, and

         therefore, there is no need of any interference in the same.

                     11. Counsel further submits that       the delinquent

         petitioner had participated in the inquiry and due opportunity

         was granted to him and a reasoned order has been passed
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                           8/13




         against him. He further submits that the Disciplinary Authority

         prior to passing the final order, has granted liberty to file second

         show-cause, which he has filed and upon considering it, specific

         finding has come that no new material has been placed by him,

         and therefore, there is no defect in the final order and not only

         original order, appellate order is also in accordance with law.

                      12. Counsel further submits that in case, this Hon’ble

         Court reaches on the conclusion that there is violation of Rule

         19(1)(d) of the CCA Rules, 2005, then in that case, the

         respondent authorities may be directed to pass a fresh order on

         the same. With this argument, he submits that the writ petition

         may either be dismissed or alternatively, a direction to the

         respondent authorities to pass a fresh order be made.

                      13. In the light of the submissions made by the

         parties, this Court upon consideration of the final order, it is

         relevant to quote the conclusive part of the order dated

         23.09.2022 (annexure-P/19 ) which states as follows:- izkIr

         izfrosnu izfr i=kad izd`fr izHkko izkf/kdkj o`f) izLrko lEizfr izHkkjh czts”k

                                      "जाँच पदाधधकारी से izkIr जाँच izfrosnu की izfr
                         धवभागीय i=kad 919, धदनांक- 20.07.2022 के दारा आरोपी
                         पदाधधकारी को उपलबध कराते हुए कारण पृ चछा की गई। आरोपी
                         पदाधधकारी से कारण पृ चछा का जवाब धदनांक-08.08.2022 को
                         धवभाग मे प्रापत हुआ। izkIr जवाब मे आरोपी पदाधधकारी दारा
                         कोई नया तथय शाधमल नहीं धकया गया।
                                      अतः आरोप की izd`fr, सं चालन पदाधधकारी से izkIr
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                           9/13




                         जाँच izfrosnu तथा आरोपी पदाधधकारी दारा समधपरत जवाब के
                         समीकोपरानत Jh czts”k कुमार धवकल, ततकालीन izHkkjh सहायक
                         धनदे शक (धवजापन धनगरम) lEizfr सहायक धनदे शक, सूचना एवं
                         जन समपकर धवभाग, धबहार, पटना को धबहार सरकारी से वव
                         (वगीरकरण, fu;a=.k एवं अपील) धनयमावली, 2005 के धनयम-14
                         के तहत धनमन दणड सं सधू चत धकया जात है :-
                                     (i) असं चयातमक izHkko से दो वे तन o`f) पर रोक।
                                     2.izLrko मे सकम izkf/kdkj का अनु मोदन izkIr है ।"

                     14. It transpires to this Court that the imposed

         punishment is minor in nature. The provision for imposing

         minor punishment is laid down under Rule 19 of the CCA

         Rules, 2005, which states as follows:-

                                     “19. Procedure for imposing minor penalties.-
                         (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 18, no
                         order imposing on a Government Servant any of the
                         penalties specified in clauses (i) to (v) of Rule 14 shall be
                         made except after-
                                     (a) informing the Government Servant in
                         writing of the proposal to take action against him and of the
                         imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour on which it is
                         proposed to be taken, and giving him reasonable
                         opportunity of making such representation as he may wish
                         to make against the proposal;
                                     (b) holding an inquiry in the manner laid down
                         in sub-rules (3) to (23) of Rule 17, in every case in which
                         the disciplinary authority is of the opinion that such inquiry
                         is necessary;
                                     (c) taking the representation, if any, submitted
                         by the Government Servant under clause (a) and the record
                         of inquiry, if any, held under clause (b) into consideration;
                                     (d) recording a finding on each imputation of
                         misconduct or misbehaviour; and
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                          10/13




                                     (e) consulting the Commission where such
                         consultation is necessary.
                                     (2) The record of the proceedings in such cases
                         shall include-
                                     (i) a copy of the intimation to the Government
                         Servant of the proposal to take action against him;
                                     (ii) a copy of the statement of imputations of
                         misconduct or misbehaviour delivered to him;
                                     (iii) his representation if any;
                                     (iv) the evidence produced during the inquiry;
                                     (v) the advice of the Commission, if any;
                                     (vi) the findings of each imputation of
                         misconduct or misbehaviour; and
                                     (vii) the orders on the case together with the
                         reasons therefor.”
                     15. It is also true that the order of minor punishment

         may be passed even if the departmental proceeding continued in

         the light of Rule 17 of the CCA Rules, 2005. But at the stage of

         Rule 18(3) of the CCA Rules, 2005, the Disciplinary Authority

         may switch over upon imposing minor penalty, which may be

         imposed even after issuance of a proposal to take action against

         delinquent with the imputations of misconduct or misbehavior

         on which it is proposed to be taken. But it shall only after giving

         him reasonable opportunity of making such representation and

         in case, the representation submitted by the Government

         servant, the disciplinary authority has to record a finding on

         each imputation of misconduct or misbehavior and then pass

         final order as per Rule 19(1)(d) of the CCA Rules, 2005.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                          11/13




                     16. It transpires to this Court that a word

         ‘representation’ used in Rule 19(1)(c) of the CCA, Rules, 2005

         is nothing, but the second show-cause. It also transpires that

         there is complete non-consideration of the second show-cause in

         the present order and in this way, violation of Rules 19(1)(d) of

         the CCA Rules, 2005 has been made. In the second show-cause

         also, the Circular/resolution of the Government is attached

         which indicates that there are three days time for placing the file

         to the next level. Here in the present case, the work has to be

         done on 15.08.2016 and on 13.08.2016, 14.08.2016 &

         15.08.2016, the office was closed and upon taking approval on

         Whatsapp, work has been done well within time by the

         petitioner. Upon opening, he supposed to take the post-facto

         approval which is presented to file for post-facto approval to

         immediate superior on 17.08.2016 before the competent

         authority and this file has seen on 18.08.2016 i.e., well within

         three days in the light of Circular/Resolution due to the closing

         of the office, but this aspect has not been considered anywhere

         either at inquiry level or at disciplinary level or at appellate

         level.

                     17. This Court is also of the view that, for the purpose

         of counting days, the law relating to the interpretation of
Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                          12/13




         statutes, particularly mentioned in Article 367 of the

         Constitution of India has to be taken care of. As General Clauses

         Act, 1897 is the law of interpretation according to the

         Constitution of India whose Section 10 clearly lays down the

         methodology for the computation of days.

                     18. It transpires to this Court that in the final order,

         there is no whisper of the said Circular, which is annexure of

         second show-cause, instead thereof, only one line statement has

         come that no new fact has been placed.

                     19. This Court is of the view that even if old fact has

         been placed before the Disciplinary Authority in the form of

         second show-cause, he ought to consider and take decision on

         this matter, due to the reason that it is not the fact rather law of

         the land also. Here in the present case, this Court is of the firm

         view that law of the land is very clear that time for placing the

         file from one stage to another is atleast three days, therefore,

         this Court held that there is no wrong done by the petitioner.

         This Court is taking this decision only due to the reason that the

         wrong alleged to be done in the year 2015-16 and then, it is

         2026 for about 10-11 years, this petitioner has suffered

         unnecessarily. In this view of the matter, this Court decides that

         instead of remanding this matter again before the respondent
             Patna High Court CWJC No.3990 of 2024 dt.12-02-2026
                                                       13/13




                      authorities, the order dated 23.09.2022 passed vide letter

                      No.1291 (Annexure-P/19) and the order dated 25.08.2023

                      passed vide letter No.1273 (Annexure-21) are hereby set aside

                      and hence, the present writ petition is hereby allowed.

                                  20. The Respondent-State through its Principal

                      Secretary, Information and Public Relation Department,

                      Government of Bihar, Patna (respondent No.1) is hereby

                      directed to take decision with regard to removing all shadow

                      upon petitioner’s service/ career within 3 months from the date

                      of production of the order.

                                  21. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the

                      present writ application stands allowed.




                                                                   (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Prakashmani/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                N/A
Uploading Date          18.02.2026
Transmission Date       N/A