Patna High Court
Sujeet KumarversusThe Bihar School Examination Board
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The disciplinary proceedings were vitiated due to non‑compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards, and the dismissal and compulsory retirement orders were set aside.
Summary
Michael Francis and Sujeet Kumar, both Class‑IV employees of the Bihar School Examination Board, were dismissed and compulsorily retired respectively after departmental inquiries that alleged unauthorized absences and involvement in a 2018 criminal case concerning tampering of BETET 2011 results. They challenged the punitive orders, arguing that the memos of charge lacked the mandatory list of witnesses and documents, that they were denied an oral enquiry and cross‑examination, and that the Enquiry Officer, who had conducted the preliminary investigation, acted as a judge in his own cause. The Board contended that the proceedings complied with its regulations and that the employees had been given sufficient opportunity to defend themselves. The High Court examined the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005 and the Board's 1964 Regulations, noting that they expressly require a detailed charge sheet with witness and document lists and a mandatory oral enquiry for major punishments. Relying on precedents such as Jagdish Sah v. State of Bihar and the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ram Prakash Singh, the Court held that the procedural safeguards were not observed, rendering the disciplinary proceedings vitiated. Consequently, the Court quashed the dismissal and retirement orders and remitted the matters to the Board for fresh consideration from the stage of issuing a proper memo of charge.
Issues considered
- The memos of charge issued to the petitioners complied with the mandatory requirements of the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005 and the Board's Regulations regarding listing of witnesses and documents.
- Whether the petitioners were afforded a statutory oral enquiry and the opportunity to cross‑examine witnesses as required for major punishments such as dismissal or compulsory retirement.
- Whether the Enquiry Officer, having conducted the preliminary investigation, could act as the enquiry officer in the departmental proceeding without violating the principle of nemo judex in causa sua.
- Whether the reliance on undisclosed call records and confessional statements without giving the petitioners a chance to challenge them violates natural justice.
Subjects
- departmental enquiry
- procedural fairness
- natural justice
- dismissal from service
- compulsory retirement
- memo of charge
- cross‑examination
- Bihar CCA Rules 2005
- Bihar School Examination Board Regulations 1964
- vitiated proceedings
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3604 of 2025
======================================================
Michael Francis Son of Louis Francis Resident of Reena Billa, Near B-110,
Buddha Colony, P.S.-Buddha Colony, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Bihar School Examination Board through its Secretary, Sinha Library
Road, Patna-800017.
2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road,
Patna-800017.
3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna-
800017.
4. Chief Vigilance Officer-Cum-Inquiry Officer, Bihar School Examination
Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna-800017.
5. The Deputy Secretary (Establishment), Bihar School Examination Board,
Sinha Library Road, Patna-800017.
6. The Joint Secretary Establishment, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha
Library Road, Patna-800017.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4007 of 2025
======================================================
Sujeet Kumar Son of Late Lalbabu Ray Resident of Gandhi Colony, Ashiana
Nagar, P.S.-Rajeev Nagar, District-Patna, Bihar-800025.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Bihar School Examination Board through its Secretary, Sinha Library
Road, Patna-800017.
2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board Sinha Library Road, Patna-
800017.
3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board Sinha Library Road, Patna-
800017.
4. Chief Vigilance Officer-Cum-Inquiry Officer, Bihar School Examination
Board Sinha Library Road, Patna-800017.
5. The Deputy Secretary (Establishment), Bihar School Examination Board
Sinha Library Road, Patna-800017.
6. The Joint Secretary Establishment, Bihar School Examination Board Sinha
Library Road, Patna-800017.
... ... Respondents
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
2/27
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3604 of 2025)
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.N. Shahi, Senior Advocate
Mr. Namrata Dubey, Advocate
Mr. Kumar Kaushik, Advocate
Mr. Hemant Raj, Advocate
Mr. Shubham Priyadarshi, Advocate
For the State : Mr. P.K.Shahi, A.G.
For the B.S.E.B. : Mr. Sunil Kumar Mandal, Advocate
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4007 of 2025)
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.N. Shahi, Senior Advocate
Mr. Namrata Dubey, Advocate
Mr. Kumar Kaushik, Advocate
Mr. Hemant Raj, Advocate
Mr. Shubham Priyadarshi, Advocate
For the State : Mr. P.K.Shahi, A.G.
For the B.S.E.B. : Mr. Girijesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
C.A.V. JUDGMENT
Date : 09-01-2026
Since the facts of these cases are same and similar,
they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this
common judgment and order.
2. In C.W.J.C. No.3604 of 2025, the petitioner
(Michael Francis) has challenged the order contained in memo
no.66 dated 16.01.2024 passed by the Secretary, Bihar School
Examination Board, by which the petitioner- Michael Francis he
has been visited with the punishment of dismissal from service
with a further stipulation that nothing shall be payable to him for
the period of suspension. In C.W.J.C. No.4007 of 2025, the
petitioner - Sujeet Kumar, has challenged the order contained in
memo no.67 dated 16.01.2024 passed by the Secretary, Bihar
School Examination Board, by which he has been visited with
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
3/27
the punishment of compulsory retirement from service with a
further stipulation that nothing shall be payable to the petitioner
except subsistence allowance for the period of suspension. The
petitioners have also challenged the appellate orders dated
19.12.2024 and 08.01.2025 respectively, by which the appeal
filed by the petitioners against the orders of punishment, have
been rejected by the Appellate Authority. They have also prayed
to direct the respondent authorities to make payment of
consequential arrears of salary for the period during which they
has been kept out of employment and also to make payment of
full salary to the petitioners for the period of suspension after
deducting the subsistence allowance already paid to them.
3. The facts of these cases are that both the
petitioners were appointed on Class-IV posts in the Bihar School
Examination Board and they were promoted to the post of
Routine Clerk in the years 2008. Whereafter, both the petitioners
have been further promoted to the post of Assistant in the year
2012. In the year 2018, a departmental proceeding was initiated
against the petitioners primarily on the allegation that they were
unauthorizedly absent from their duties and for their
involvement/role in the criminal case bearing Kotwali P.S. Case
No.452 of 2018 dated 19.07.2018. Against the petitioner-
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
4/27
Micheal Francis, altogether seven charges have been framed,
which primarily revolved around the allegation of unauthorized
absence from the duty and for his involvement/role in the
criminal case bearing Kotwali P.S. Case No.452 of 2018 dated
19.07.2018. Thereafter, a supplementary memo of charge was
also submitted wherein one additional charge has been framed
against the aforesaid petitioner that despite being suspended, he
did not join his assigned headquarters for about five months.
4. So far as petitioner - Sujeet Kumar is
concerned, altogether five charges have been framed against
him, which also revolved around his unauthorized absence from
the duties and also his involvement/role in the criminal case
bearing Kotwali P.S. Case No.452 of 2018 dated 19.07.2018.
5. Thereafter, the Enquiry Officer issued memo
dated 15.07.2019 upon the petitioners annexing the charges
levelled against them and directed the petitioners to submit their
reply/defence. The petitioners by filing representation/
applications requested to supply certain document, based on
which, charges were levelled against them. Whereafter, the
petitioners have submitted their written responses/replies. The
Enquiry Officer after conducting the enquiry submitted the
enquiry report to the respondent-Board finding the charges
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
5/27
against the petitioner- Michael Francis to be true whereas,
against the petitioner-Sujit Kumar it has been concluded that the
involvement of the petitioner cannot be ruled out and he cannot
be exonerated from the charges. Based on the enquiry report,
second show-cause notices were issued to the petitioners, to
which the petitioners have filed their respective response/reply.
Upon considering the reply to the second show-cause, the
disciplinary authority issued the impugned orders contained in
memo nos.66 and 67 both dated 16.01.2024 dismissing the
petitioner-Michael Francis from the service and compulsorily
retiring the petitioner - Sujeet Kumar from the service.
6. For better appreciating of facts of both these
cases, it will be relevant to quote the impugned orders of
punishment. The impugned order passed in the case of petitioner
- Michael Francis reads as under:-
i=kad&LFkk0izs0&66@2024
fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr] iVuk
dk;kZy; vkns’k
Jh ekbZdy Ýzkafll] lgk;d ¼fuyafcr½ ds }kjk fnukad&19-07-
2018 ls fcuk fdlh lwpuk@vkosnu ds dk;kZy; ls vuf/kd`r :i ls
vuqifLFkr ik;s tkus ds dkj.k Kkikad&,y0ih0&5364] fnukad&20-07-2018
ds }kjk muls Li"Vhdj.k dh ekax dh x;hA Jh Ýzkafll dk fnukad & 20-
07-2018 dks ,d vkosnu dk;kZy; esa izkIr gqvk] ftlesa fnukad&20-07-2018
ls 25-07-2018 rd vkdfLed vodk'k esa jgus dh lwpuk izkIr gqbZ] ftls
lfefr dk;kZy; ds }kjk vLohd`r djrs gq, Li"Vhdj.k dh ekax dh x;h
Fkh] ijUrq Jh Ýzkafll }kjk Li’Vhdj.k dk mRrj ugha fn;k x;k] ftlds
vkjksi esa lfefr ds Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&6089] fnukad&27-07-2018 ds }kjk
fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr fofu;ekoyh&1964 ds v/;k;&10 dh
dafMdk&48¼i½ ds vUrxZr rRdky izHkko ls fuyafcr djrs gq, foHkkxh;
dk;Zokgh ds v/khu fd;k x;kA
2- mYys[kuh; gS fd dksrokyh Fkkuk dkaM la0&452@18] fnukad&19-07-
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
6/27
2018 esa lafyIr Jh Ýzkafll ds fo:) lk{; miyC/k djkus gsrq lfefr ds
i=kad&LFkk0izs0&6305] fnukad 01-09-2018 ds }kjk Fkkuk izHkkjh] dksrokyh
Fkkuk] iVuk dks i= izsf"kr fd;k x;k] ftlds vkyksd esa iqfyl voj
fujh{kd dksrokyh Fkkuk] iVuk ds i=kad&Mh0vkj0ua0&1942] fnukad&19-
09-2019 ds }kjk Jh Ýzkafll ds laca/k esa lk{; miyC/k djk;k x;kA
3- mDr ds vkyksd esa Jh Ýzkafll dks fuyafcr djus ds mijkar lfefr
ds Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&6605] fnukad&29-10-2018 ds }kjk Jh Ýzkafll]
lgk;d ds fo:) vkjksi i= izi= **d** esa xfBr fuEukafdr vkjksiksa dh
tkap gsrq foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh lapkfyr fd;k x;k%&
¼i½ vkids }kjk fnukad&19-07-2018 ls fcuk fdlh lwpuk@vkosnu
ds dk;kZy; ls vuf/kd`r :i ls vuqifLFkr gksus ds dkj.k
Kkikad&,y0ih0&5364] fnukad&20-07-2018 ds }kjk Li’Vhdj.k
dh ekax fd;k x;k] ijUrq vkids }kjk Li’Vhdj.k dk tokc ugha
fn;k x;kA vkidk ;g d`R; dk;kZy; ds izfr ?kksj ykijokgh]
vuq'kklughurk ,oa LosPNkpkfjrk dk |ksrd gSA
¼ii½ vkidk fnukad&20-07-2018 dks ,d vkosnu dk;kZy; esa izkIr
gqvk] ftlesa fnukad&20-07-2018 ls 25-07-2018 rd vkdfLed
vodk'k esa jgus dh lwpuk izkIr gqbZ] ftls lfefr dk;kZy;
esa ,y0ih0&5364] fnukad&20-07-2018 ds }kjk vLohd`r djrs gq,
Li’Vhdj.k dh ekax fd;k x;k] ijUrq vkids }kjk Li’Vhdj.k dk
tokc ugha fn;k x;kA vkidk ;g d`R; dk;kZy; ds izfr ?kksj
ykijokgh] vuq'kklughurk ,oa LosPNkpkfjrk dk |ksrd gSA
¼iii½ bl dkaM esa fxj¶rkj gq, vfHk;qDr vfer dqekj] vfers'k
dqekj] tVk'kadj feJ us vius c;ku esa crk;k x;k gS fd
ch0bZ0Vh0bZ0Vh0&2011 ds ijh{kkQy esa Qsjcny djus esa vkidk
eq[; Hkwfedk jgh gSA lkFk gh vki ckgjh nyky ls laidZ dj
Qsy vH;fFkZ;ksa dks ikl djkus dk dk;Z djrs FksA
¼iv½ bl dkaM esa fxj¶rkj gq, nyky fot; dqekj frokjh mQZ
frokjh }kjk vius c;ku esa crk;k x;k gS fd vkius vfer dqekj]
vfers'k dqekj] tVk'kadj feJ rFkk jathr feJk ds laidZ esa
jgdj 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa ds vfHkys[ k@dEI;wVj vkadMk esa cnyko
djk;s gSA
¼v½ bl dkaM esa fxj¶rkj nyky fot; dqekj frokjh us crk;k gS
fd ch0bZ0Vh0bZ0Vh0&2011 ds ijh{kkQy esa vkids }kjk dEI;wVj
ds vkadMk esa vjfoUn dqekj] vfer dqekj] vfers'k dqekj ls
cnyko djok;k x;k rFkk vfHkys[k esa tVk'kadj feJ] jathr feJk
ls feydj cnyko djk;k x;kA bl cnyko esa vkidh vge
Hkwfedk Fkh] D;ksafd mlh izdkj dk dkxt ,oa Nik;h vkids }kjk
gh djokbZ tkrh FkhA
¼vi½ bl dkaM esa oSKkfud vuqla/kku ds rgr nyky fot; frokjh
mQZ frokjh ds eksckby ua0 ij vkids eksckbZy ua0 ls ckrphr
gksus dk lk{; ik;k x;k gSA
¼vii½ vkidk mijksDr vkpj.k fcgkj ljdkjh lsod vkpj.k
fu;ekoyh&1976 ds fu;e&3¼1½ ,oa 3¼2½ ds vuq:i ugha gSA
4- lfefr ds dk;kZy; ds i=kad&LFkk0izs0&6089] fnukad&27-07-2018 ds }
kjk Jh Ýzkafll dks fuyafcr djrs gq, eq[;ky; Jh izoh.k dqekj flag] mi
lfpo d{k ¼ek0 iz0½ esa fu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k] ijUrq muds }kjk lle; vius
eq[;ky; esa ;ksxnku ugha djus ds vkjksi esa lfefr ds
Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&108] fnukad&16-01-2019 ds }kjk iwjd vkjksi i= xfBr
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
7/27
dj fuEukafdr vkjksiksa dh tkWp gsrq foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh lapkfyr fd;k x;k
%&
¼i½ lfefr dk;kZy; ds Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&6089] fnukad&27-07-
2018 }kjk gh vkidks rRdky izHkko ls fuyafcr djrs gq,
foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh ds v/khu fd;k x;k rFkk fuyacu vof/k esa
vkidk eq[;ky; Jh izoh.k dqekj flag] mi lfpo d{k ¼ek0 iz0½
fu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k] ijUrq vkids }kjk vR;kf/kd foyac ds lkFk
fnuakd&14-12-2018 dks dk;kZy; esa ;ksxnku gsrq vkosnu fn;k
x;kA vkidk ;g d`R; dk;kZy; ds izfr ?kksj ykijokgh]
vuq'kklughurk] vkns'k dh vogsyuk ,oa LosPNkpkfjrk dk |ksrd
gSA
5- mDr foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh esa lapky; inkf/kdkjh ds i=kad&fu0ls0&222]
fnukad&12-07-2023 }kjk tkWp izfrosnu lefiZr fd;k x;k] ftlesa tkap
inkf/kdkjh dk earO; gS fd fnukad&19-07-2018 dks fcuk NqV~Vh ds vkjksih
dk;kZy; ls vuqifLFkr jgs rFkk vius ;ksxnku djus dh frfFk ds iwoZ rd
vius NqV~Vh ds vH;kosnu dks Lohd`r djkus dk dksbZ Hkh iz;kl ugha fd;k]
tcfd fcgkj lsok lafgrk ds NqV~Vh laca/kh fu;eksa esa Li’V mYys[k gS fd
NqV~Vh fdlh dehZ dk vf/kdkj ugha gS vkSj NqV~Vh Lohd`r djkdj gh fdlh
ljdkjh lsod dks eq[;ky; NksMuk pkfg,A vaduh; gS fd dksrokyh Fkkuk
dkaM la0&452@2018] fnukad&19-07-2018 ds ekeys esa lfefr
dk;kZy; }kjk fcgkj izkjafHkd f'k{kd ik=rk ijh{kk o"kZ&2011 ds
¼BETET&2011½ ijh{kkQy iath ,oa dEI;wVj MkVkcsl esa QthZ rjhds ls
vH;fFkZ;ksa dks ykHk igqapkus ds fy, Jh vfers”k dqekj] Jh vjfoUn dqekj]
Jh tVk'kadj feJ] Jh jathr feJk ,oa 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa rFkk vU; vKkr ds
fo:) izkFkfed ntZ djk;k x;k FkkA bl ?kksVkys ds tkap gsrq fcgkj
fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr }kjk ,d f=&lnL;h; tkap lfefr dk xBu fd;k
x;k FkkA tkap lfefr us fnukad&19-07-2018 dks lefiZr vius izfrosnu esa
crk;k fd **f'kdk;r i= esa vafdr 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa ds laca/k esa vkjksi dh
tkap esa ik;k x;k fd blls lacaf/kr dEI;wVj lsy esa la/kkfjr MkVk esa
fjtYV izkslslj ls izkIr djk, x, ewy lh0Mh0 ds MkVk ls ifjofrZr ik;k
x;k gSA lkFk gh bl f'kdk;r i= esa vafdr 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa esa 10 vH;fFkZ;ksa
ds ijh{kkQy ls lacaf/kr vad fu;kstu iath ¼Mh0Vh0vkj0½ dk iUuk
cnydj u;k iUuk rS;kj djkdj ftYncan fd;k gqvk ik;k x;kA**
lfefr us bl QthZokjk ds fy, dEI;wVj 'kk[kk ,oa vfHkys[kkxkj ds
vusd dfeZ;ksa dks fpfUgr djrs gq, muds fo:) izkFkfedh ntZ djus dh
vuq'kalk dh] ftlesa tkap ds dze esa izkFkfedh vfHk;qDrksa us vkjksih dh
lafyIrrk dk Hkh c;ku fn;k fd ;g idMk;s vfHk;qDr vfer dqekj]
vfers'k dqekj] tVk'kadj feJ bR;kfn us vius&vius LohdkjksfDr c;ku esa
crk;s gS fd BETET&2011 ijh{kk ds ifj.kke esa Qsjcny@cnyko esa
ekbZdy Ýzkafll] lgk;d ¼teqbZ ijh{kk½ dh eq[; Hkwfedk gSA lkFk esa ;s Hkh
crk;s gS fd ekbZdy Ýzkafll] jkts'k jatu mQZ jktk ,oa jgeku] frokjh
uke ds O;fDr tks fcgkj cksMZ dk nyky Fkk ds laidZ esa Fks rFkk fdl
vH;FkhZ dk D;k psat djuk gS] rhuksa }kjk r; djds psat djrs FksA idMk;s
nyky fot; dqekj frokjh mQZ frokjh }kjk vius LohdkjksfDr c;ku esa
crk;s gS fd ekbZdy Ýzkafll us vfer dqekj] vfers'k dqekj] tVk'kadj
feJ ,oa jathr feJk ds laidZ esa jgdj 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa ds
vfHkys[k@dEI;wVj vkWdMk esa cnyko djok;s gSA lkFk gh nyky fot;
dqekj frokjh us viuh LohdkjksfDr c;ku esa crk;s gS fd BETET&2011
ijh{kk ls lacaf/kr fjtYV esa ekbZy Ýzkafll] dEI;wVj ds vkWdMk esa vjfoUn
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
8/27
dqekj] vfer dqekj] vfers'k dqekj ls cnyko djok;k rFkk vfHkys[k esa
tVk'kadj feJ] jathr feJk ls feydj cnyko djok;kA mDr cnyko esa
ekbZdy Ýzkafll us vge Hkwfedk fuHkk;h] pqafd mlh izdkj dk dkxt ,oa
Nik;h ekbZdy Ýzkafll gh djokrk FkkA
;g fd oSKkfud vuqla/kku ds rgr nyky fot; dqekj frokjh mQZ
frokjh ds eksckbZy uEcj ij ekbZdy Ýzkafll ds eksckbZy uEcj ls ckrphr
gksus dk lk{; ik;k x;k gSA KkrO; gks fd vizkFkfedh vfHk;qDr fot;
dqekj frokjh fnukad&29-08-2018 dks Fkkuk ifjlj dksrokyh esa
vuqla/kkudrkZ }kjk ,d iz'ukoyh ds rgr iwNrkN dh x;h] ftlds iz'u
09 esa ;g iwNk x;k fd fcgkj cksMZ ds fdu&fdu dfeZ;ksa ds laidZ esa oks
Fks] rks mlus crk;k fd vU; ds vfrfjDr ekbZdy Ýzkafll Hkh laidZ esa FksA
vkjksih ds ckjs esa iz'ukoyh ds iz'u 10] 11] 13] 14] 15 ,oa 17 ds mRrj esa
mlus vad cnyko djus laca/kh xfrfof/k esa vkjksih dh Hkwfedk ds laca/k esa
vusd rF; mn/kkfVr djrs gq, crk;k fd vfHkys[k ds dkxtkr ds leku
dkxtkr dk izca/ku vkSj Nik;h dk dke vkjksih ds }kjk gh djk;k tkrk
FkkkA vkxs iz'u 17 ds mRrj esa muds }kjk crk;k x;k fd naMkjh Fkkuk esa
dkaM ntZ gksus ij tc Kkr gqvk fd dEI;wVj esa cnyko ugha gqvk gS] rc
oks vfer dqekj] vfers'k dqekj ,oa vkjksih ls laidZ dj igys dEI;wVj ds
vkWdMk esa cnyok djk;kA fcpkSfy;k us ;g Hkh crk;k fd QthZ dkxtkr
Nik;h djokus dh eq[; ftEesokjh vkjksih dh gh FkhA vUos"k.k ds dze esa
fcpkSfy;k frokjh ds dkaM la[;k ds vfHk;qDrksa ls eksckbZy ij gq, ckrphr
dk C;kSjk Hkh izkIr fd;k x;k] ftlesa mudk eksckbZy ua0& xxxxxxx ls 13
vizSy 2018 ls tqykbZ 2018 rd dqy&12 ckj ckrphr djus dk lk{;
miyC/k gqvk gSA bl izdkj Jh Qzkafll ds fo:) xfBr lHkh vkjksi
la0&01] 02] 03] 04] 05] 06 ,oa 07 izekf.kr ik;s x;s gSA lkFk gh Jh
Qzkafll ds fo:) xfBr iwjd vkjksi dks Hkh izekf.kr fd;k x;k gSA
6- mDr tkap izfrosnu esa Jh Ýzkafll ds fo:) xfBr lHkh vkjksi izekf.kr
ik;s tkus ds QyLo:i tkWp izfrosnu dh izfr layXu djrs gq, lfefr ds
Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&873] fnukad 18-07-2023 }kjk Jh Ýzkafll ls f}rh; dkj.k
i`PNk dh ekax dh x;hA
7- Jh Ýzkafll ls fnukad&02-08-2023 dks izkIr f}rh; dkj.k i`PNk ds
tokc esa dgk x;k gS fd tkap vf/kxe ds }kjk buds fo:) xfBr vkjksiksa
dks ek= dfri; lg vfHk;qDrksa ds }kjk iqfyl ds le{k fn;s x;s c;ku ds
vk/kkj ij izekf.kr fd;k x;k gS] tcfd LFkkfir fof/kd O;oLFkk ;Fkk
Hkkjrh; lk{; vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk&25 ds vuqlkj iqfyl vf/kdkjh ds le{k
LohdkjksfDr Lohdkj lk{; ugha gSA tkap vf/kxe esa iqfyl ds le{k vkjksiksa
ds laca/k esa ;g vfHk;qDrksa ds c;ku ds vykok mudh lafyIrrk ds laca/k esa
dqN Hkh vafdr ugha fd;k x;k gS rFkk ek= iqfyl ds le{k lg
vfHk;qDrksa }kjk fn;k x;k c;ku ds vk/kkj ij buds fo:) xfBr vkjksiksa
dks izekf.kr Bgjk;k tkuk fof/k vuqdwy ugha gSA Jh Ýzkafll }kjk vius
tokc esa tkWp inkf/kdkjh ds le{k fn, x;s cpko c;ku ds vfrfjDr dqN
u;k rF; izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa muds }kjk lefiZr
f}rh; dkj.k i`PNk dk tokc Lohdkj ;ksX; ugha ik;k x;k gSA
8- mi;qZDr lHkh rF;ksa ls Li’V gS fd ,d laxfBr fxjksg }kjk tkylkth
djds vH;fFkZ;ksa ds vadks esa gsjkQsjh dk dk;Z fd;k x;k] ftlesa budk
eq[; Hkwfedk jgk gSA buds }kjk vius in dk nq:i;ksx dj diVrkiwoZd
lfefr ds vfHkys[k ds lkFk voS/k :i ls NsMNkM djrs gq, /kks[kk/kMh ls
futh LokFkZ esa lfefr dks xqejkg fd;k x;k rFkk BETET&2011 ijh{kk
ds ifj.kke esa dEI;wVj lsy esa la/kkfjr MkVk esa rFkk vad fu;kstu iath ds
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
9/27
lkFk NsMNkM djus esa lafyIrrk ik;k x;kA buds }kjk mDr tkylkth
d`R;ksa ls lfefr dh izfr"Bk dks xgjk vk?kkr igqapk gS] tks dk;Zfgr ,oa
iz'kklfud n`f’Vdks.k ls drbZ Lohdkj ;ksX; ugha gSA mudk vkpj.k
ljdkjh dfeZ;ksa ds fy, cuk;h x;h vkpj.k lafgrk ds loZFkk izfrdwy
gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa Jh Ýzkafll dks lfefr dh lsok esa cuk;s j[kuk lfefr
ds fgr esa ugha gSA
9- vr% mi;qZDr of.kZr lHkh rF;ksa ,oa dkxtkrksa dh leh{kksijkar
lE;d~ fopkjksijkar Jh ekbZdy Ýzkafll] lgk;d ¼fuyafcr½ ds }kjk f}rh;
dkj.k i`PNk ds tokc dks vLohd`r dj vkns'kkuqlkj] Jh Ýzkafll dks fcgkj
fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr fofu;ekoyh&1964 ds v/;k;&10 dh dafMdk&50
dh mi dafMdk&¼viii½ esa fufgr izko/kku ds vkyksd esa rRdky izHkko ls
lfefr dh lsok ls c[kkZLr ¼Dismissal from service½ dk naM
vf/kjksfir fd;k tkrk gSA fuyacu vof/k esa Jh Ýzkafll dks thou fuokZg
HkRrk ds vfrfjDr dqN Hkh ns; ugha gksxkA
7. The impugned order passed in the case of
petitioner - Sujeet Kumar reads as under -
i=kad&LFkk0izs0&67@2024
fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr] iVuk
dk;kZy; vkns’k
Jh lqthr dqekj&1] lgk;d ¼fuyafcr½ ds }kjk fnukad&20-07-
2018 ls fcuk fdlh lwpuk@vkosnu ds dk;kZy; ls vuf/kd`r :i ls
vuqifLFkr ik;s tkus ds dkj.k Kkikad&,y0ih0&5364] fnukad&20-07-2018
ds }kjk muls Li"Vhdj.k dh ekax dh x;hA Jh dqekj dk fnukad&20-07-
2018 dks ,d vkosnu dk;kZy; esa izkIr gqvk] ftlesa fnukad&20-07-2018 ls
24-07-2018 rd vkdfLed vodk'k esa jgus dh lwpuk izkIr gqbZ] ftls
lfefr dk;kZy; ds }kjk vLohd`r djrs gq, Li"Vhdj.k dh ekax dh x;h
Fkh] ijUrq Jh dqekj }kjk Li’Vhdj.k dk mRrj ugha fn;k x;k] ftlds
vkjksi esa lfefr ds Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&6090] fnukad&27-07-2018 ds }kjk Jh
dqekj&1 dks fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr fofu;ekoyh&1964 ds
v/;k;&10 dh dafMdk&48¼i½ ds vUrxZr rRdky izHkko ls fuyafcr djrs
gq, foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh ds v/khu fd;k x;kA
2- mYys[kuh; gS fd dksrokyh Fkkuk dkaM la0&452@18] fnukad&19-07-
2018 esa Jh dqekj ds fo:) fxj¶rkjh dh lwpuk lk{; lfgr miyC/k
djkus gsrq lfefr ds i=kad&LFkk0izs0&6292] fnukad 31-08-2018 ds }kjk
Fkkuk izHkkjh] dksrokyh Fkkuk] iVuk dks i= izsf"kr fd;k x;k] ftlds
vkyksd esa iqfyl voj fujh{kd dksrokyh Fkkuk] iVuk ds
i=kad&Mh0vkj0ua0&1941] fnukad&19-09-2018 ds }kjk Jh dqekj dks
fxj¶rkj dj fnukad 30-07-2018 ls U;kf;d fgjklr esa fy;s tkus rFkk
vkn'kZ dsUnzh; dkjk csmj esa dkjk/khu esa jgus dh lwpuk izkIr gqbZA
3- mDr ds vkyksd esa Jh dqekj&1] lgk;d dks fuyafcr djus ds
mijkar lfefr ds Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&6610] fnukad&29-10-2018 ds }kjk Jh
dqekj&1] lgk;d ds fo:) vkjksi i= izi= **d** esa xfBr fuEukafdr
vkjksiksa dh tkap gsrq foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh lapkfyr fd;k x;k%&
¼i½ vkids }kjk fnukad&20-07-2018 ls fcuk fdlh lwpuk@vkosnu
ds dk;kZy; ls vuf/kd`r :i ls vuqifLFkr gksus ds dkj.k
Kkikad&,y0ih0&5364] fnukad&20-07-2018 ds }kjk Li’Vhdj.k
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
10/27
dh ekax fd;k x;k] ijUrq vkids }kjk Li’Vhdj.k dk tokc ugha
fn;k x;kA vkidk ;g d`R; dk;kZy; ds izfr ?kksj ykijokgh]
vuq'kklughurk ,oa LosPNkpkfjrk dk |ksrd gSA
¼ii½ vkidk fnukad&20-07-2018 dks ,d vkosnu dk;kZy; esa izkIr
gqvk] ftlesa fnukad&20-07-2018 ls 24-07-2018 rd vkdfLed
vodk'k esa jgus dh lwpuk izkIr gqbZ] ftls lfefr dk;kZy;
esa ,y0ih0&5364] fnukad&20-07-2018 ds }kjk vLohd`r djrs gq,
Li’Vhdj.k dh ekax fd;k x;k] ijUrq vkids }kjk Li’Vhdj.k dk
tokc ugha fn;k x;kA vkidk ;g d`R; dk;kZy; dk;Z ds izfr
?kksj ykijokgh] vuq'kklughurk ,oa LosPNkpkfjrk dk |ksrd gSA
¼iii½ vkids }kjk vfHk;qDr vfer dqekj] dEI;wVj lsy ds izHkkjh
ls ,d o"kZ igys laidZ dj 10 Qsy vH;fFkZ;ksa dks ikl djokus ds
fy, 30 gtkj :i;k ds nj ls 3 yk[k :i;k fn;k x;kA
vkids }kjk vius c;ku esa Lohdkj fd;k x;k gS fd
ch0bZ0Vh0bZ0Vh0&2011 ds ijh{kkQy esa xM+cM+h djkus ds fy, 10
Qsy vH;kfFkZ;ksa dks ikl djkus ds fy, jbZl vgen ls 4 yk[k
50 gtkj :i;k fy;k x;k] ftlesa ls 3 yk[k :i;k dEI;wVj
MkVk esa lq/kkj djus gsrq ,oa izek.k i= cukus gsrq vfer dqekj dks
fn;k x;k rFkk 'ks’k 1 yk[k ipkl gtkj :i;k vius ikl j[k
fy;k x;kA
¼iv½ iqfyl voj fujh{kd dksrokyh Fkkuk] iVuk ds le{k
vkids }kjk ch0bZ0Vh0bZ0Vh0&2011 ds ijh{kkQy esa Qsy Nk=ksa dks
ikl djkus ds ,ot esa 10 vH;kfFkZ;ksa ls yh x;h jkf'k ls lacaf/kr
vH;kfFkZ;ksa dk dksM&31 crk;k x;kA lkFk gh vkidks U;kf;d
fgjklr esa j[kk x;kA
¼v½ vkidk mijksDr vkpj.k fcgkj ljdkjh lsod vkpj.k
fu;ekoyh&1976 ds fu;e&3¼1½ ,oa 3¼2½ ds vuq:i ugha gSA
4- Jh dqekj&1 }kjk ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] iVuk esa nk;j okn
la0&Criminal Miscellaneous No-61689@18 esa fnukad&29-10-2018
dks ikfjr U;k;kns'k ds vkyksd esa fnukad&31-10-2018 dks U;kf;d fgjklr
ls fjgk gksdj Jh dqekj&1 }kjk fnukad&01-11-2018 dks lfefr dk;kZy; esa
;ksxnku gsrq vkosnu lefiZr fd;k x;k rFkk lfefr ds
Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&6808] fnukad&11-12-2018 ds }kjk fcgkj ljdkjh lsod
¼oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k ,oa vihy½ fu;ekoyh&2005 ds fu;e&9¼3½ ¼i½ esa
fufgr izko/kku ds vUrxZr lfefr dk;kZy; esa Jh dqekj&1 }kjk fn;s
x;s ;ksxnku dh frfFk fnukad&01-11-2018 ds izHkko ls ;ksxnku Lohd`r
djrs gq, fuyacu ls eqDr fd;k x;kA
5- Jh dqekj&1 ds fo:) dksrokyh Fkkuk] iVuk dkaM la0&452@18]
fnukad&19-07-2018 vUos"k.k esa jgus rFkk muds fo:) foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh
lapkfyr jgus ds vkjksi esa lfefr ds Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&6809] fnukad&11-
12-2018 }kjk fcgkj ljdkjh lsod ¼oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k ,oa vihy½
fu;ekoyh&2005 ds fu;e&9¼3½ ¼ii½ esa fufgr izko/kku ds vUrxZr Jh
dqekj&1 dks lfefr dk;kZy; esa ;ksxnku dh frfFk fnukad&01-11-2018 ds
izHkko ls iqu% fuyafcr djrs gq, foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh ds v/khu fd;k x;kA
6- mDr foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh esa lapkyu inkf/kdkjh ds
i=kad&fu0ls0&208] fnukad&30-06-2023 }kjk tkWp izfrosnu lefiZr fd;k
x;k] ftlesa Jh dqekj&1 ds fo:) tkap inkf/kdkjh dk earO; gS fd
izFke vkjksi vkjksih }kjk fnukad&20-07-2018 dks vuf/kd`r :i ls
vuqifLFkr gksus rFkk Li’Vhdj.k dk tokc ugha nsus ds laca/k esa gSA bl
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
11/27
laca/k esa budk dguk gS fd bUgksaus vkdfLed vodk'k dk vkosnu ns fn;k
Fkk rFkk vkosnu ds vLohd`r gksus ds ckjs esa dksbZ lwpuk izkIr ugha gqvk]
tks vlarks’ktud gS rFkk fu;eksa ds izfrdwy gSA fcgkj lsok lafgrk
fu;e&152 ds vkyksd esa NqV~Vh dks vf/kdkj ds :i esa iz;ksx ugha fd;k
tk ldrk gSA ljdkj ds fofHkUu i=ksa }kjk bls Li’V fd;k x;k gS fd
fu;a=h inkf/kdkjh ls NqV~Vh Lohd`r djkdj gh fdlh dehZ dks eq[;ky;
NksMuk pkfg,A fcuk NqV~Vh Lohd`r djk;s eq[;ky; NksM nsuk vkSj ;g
vis{kk djuk fd vLohd`fr muds ?kj ij lalwfpr fd;k tk;] fcYdqy
LosPNkpkfjrk dk |ksrd gSA
vkjksi la0&03 ,oa 04 iqfyl voj fujh{kd dksrokyh Fkkuk ds
izfrosnu ds vk/kkj ij xfBr fd;k x;k gS] ftlesa dkaM la0&452@18 esa
uketn vfHk;qDr vfer dqekj ds c;ku ds vk/kkj ij vkjksih dks fxj¶rkj
fd;k x;kA idMs x;s vfHk;qDr vfer dqekj] dEI;wVj lsy izHkkjh }kjk
LohdkjksfDr c;ku esa crk;k x;k fd ,d o"kZ igys fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk
lfefr esa lgk;d ¼leLrhiqj ijh{kk 'kk[kk½ lqthr dqekj us 10 Qsy
vH;fFkZ;ksa dks ikl djokus ds fy, 30 gtkj :i;s dh nj ls 3 yk[k
:i;k fn;k FkkA vkjksih us vius LohdkjksfDr c;ku esa crk;k fd
BETET&2011 ijh{kk ds ifj.kke esa gqbZ /kka/kyh@xMcMh esa vkjksih ds }
kjk 10 Qsy vH;fFkZ;ksa dks ikl djokus ds fy, jbZl vgen ls 4 yk[k 50
gtkj :i;k fy;k] ftlesa ls 3 yk[k dEI;wVj MkVk esa lq/kkj ,oa izek.k i=
cukus gsrq vfer dqekj dks fn;k vkSj 1 yk[k 50 gtkj :i;k vius ikl
j[k fy;k] lkFk gh vH;fFkZ;ksa dk dksM&31 crk;kA
bl lanHkZ esa vius Li"Vhdj.k esa vkjksih us crk;k gS fd vfer dqekj
ls budk dksbZ laca/k ugha jgk gS rFkk jbZl vgen ds uke ds O;fDr dks Hkh
ugha tkurs gSA iqfyl }kjk vfHkdFku ij tcju gLrk{kj djk fy;k x;kA
lkFk gh iwjd Li"Vhdj.k esa bUgksaus vius leFkZu esa ;g Hkh crk;k gS fd
iqfyl us bl dkaM ds nyky frokjh ds dkWy fMVsy dh tkap dh] ftlesa
buds lkFk dksbZ ckrphr ugha gqvk gSA bUgksaus ;g Hkh crk;k fd iqfyl
vfHkj{kk esa fn;s c;ku dks lk{; ds :i esa ugha ekuk tkuk pkfg,]
ijUrq ;g lR; gS fd BETET&2011 ds ijh{kkQy esa xM+cM+h fd;k x;k
vkSj tkap lfefr us xM+cM+h ds lk{; ik,A f=&lnL;h; lfefr us ik;k
fd f'kdk;r i= esa vafdr 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa ds laca/k esa vkjksi dh tkap esa
ik;k x;k fd blls lacaf/kr dEI;wVj lsy esa la/kkfjr MkVk esa fjtYV
izkslslj ls izkIr djk;s x;s ewy lh0Mh0 ds MkVk ls ifjofrZr ik;k x;k gSA
lkFk gh bl f'kdk;r i= esa vafdr 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa esa 10 vH;fFkZ;ksa ds
ijh{kkQy ls lacaf/kr vad fu;kstu iath ¼Mh0Vh0vkj0½ dk iUuk cnydj
u;k iUuk rS;kj djkdj ftYncan fd;k gqvk Hkh ik;k x;k gSA
vkjksih dk dguk gS fd iqfyl us tcjnLrh vfHkdFku ij gLrk{kj
djk fy;k Hkh ekU; ugha gSA bUgsa ,slh fLFkfr esa lk{; vf/kfu;e dh
/kkjk&164 ds vUrxZr U;k;ky; esa viuk c;ku ntZ djkuk pkfg, Fkk]
ijUrq buds }kjk ,slk ugha fd;k x;kA vr% bl rjg ds dEI;wVj MkVk
csl esa NsM+NkM+ djokus] ijh{kkQy cnyokus] /kka/kyh djkus dh lkft'k esa
budh lafyIrrk ls badkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk gSA budk vkpj.k lansg ls
ijs ugha gSA bl izdkj vkjksih Jh lqthr dqekj&1 ds fo:) xfBr
dqy&05 vkjksiksa esa ls vkjksi la0&01] 02 ,oa 05 izekf.kr ik;s x;s rFkk
vkjksi la0&03 ,oa 04 ds fy, Hkh nks’keqDr ugha fd;k x;k gSA
7- mDr tkap izfrosnu esa Jh dqekj&1 ds fo:) xfBr dqy&05
vkjksiksa esa ls vkjksi la0&01] 02 ,oa 05 izekf.kr ik;s x;s rFkk vkjksi
la0&03 ,oa 04 ds fy, Hkh nks’keqDr ugha ik;s tkus ds QyLo:i tkWp
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
12/27
izfrosnu dh izfr layXu djrs gq, lfefr ds Kkikad&LFkk0izs0&807] fnukad
04-07-2023 }kjk Jh dqekj&1 ls f}rh; dkj.k i`PNk dh ekax dh x;hA
8- Jh dqekj&1 ls fnukad&19-07-2023 dks izkIr f}rh; dkj.k i`PNk ds
tokc esa dgk x;k gS fd fnukad&20-07-2018 ls 24-07-2018 rd
vkdfLed vodk'k dk vkosnu nsdj vfrvko';d ifjokfjd dk;Zo'k
dk;kZy; ls vuqifLFkr jgsaA tgka rd i=kad&,y0ih0&5364] fnukad&23-
07-2018 ds }kjk vkosnu vLohd`r djrs gq, Li’Vhdj.k dh ekax dh x;h]
og i= eq>s gLrxr ugha djk;k x;k gSA vkdfLed vodk'k ds laca/k esa
Li’V djuk gS fd vpkud vkdfLed ifjfLFkfr esa fdlh Hkh ljdkjh lsod
}kjk Hksts x;s vkdfLed vodk'k ds vkosnu ij Lohd`fr izkIr fd;k tkuk
O;ogkfjd :i ls vlaHko izrhr gksrk gSA Jh vfer dqekj }kjk buds mij
yxk;s x;s vkjksi ls fyf[kr :i ls badkj fd;k x;kA buds Lohd`fr
c;ku dks iqfyl }kjk 'kkjhfjd ,oa ekufld :i ls izrkfM+r dj vius <ax
ls ys[ku dj tcju gLrk{kj djk;k x;k] tcfd lk{; vf/kfu;e&1872 ds
v/;k;&2 ist&12 ds dze la[;k&26 esa bldk Li’V mYys[k gS fd iqfyl
vfHkj{kk esa nh x;h c;ku dh ekU;rk ugha nh x;h gSA f}rh; dkj.k i`PNk
esa 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa ds ekeys esa budh lafyIrrk n'kkZ;k x;k gS] ftlds laca/k
esa f=&lnL;h; lfefr ds tkap esa ik;k gS fd 16 vH;kfFkZ;ksa dk fjtYV
izkslslj ls izkIr djk;s x;s ewy lh0Mh0 ,oa MkVkcsl ls ifjorZu ik;k x;k
lkFk gh 16 esa ls 10 vH;fFkZ;ksa dk Mh0Vh0vkj0 dk iUuk psat dj ftYncan
ik;k x;k gSA bl izdj.k esa dkaM la0&452@18 esa rFkkdfFkr ¼nyky½
fot; dqekj frokjh dks iqfyl }kjk fxj¶rkj fd;k x;k] nyky us vius
c;ku esa ftu 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa dk uke fy;k gS] ewy lh0Mh0 ,oa MkVkcsl esa
NsM+NkM+ ik;kA blesa ls 10 vH;fFkZ;ksa dk Mh0Vh0vkj0 dk iUuk psat dj
ftYncan ik;k x;k gSA og lHkh 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa dk frokjh }kjk vius
iz'ukoyh esa uke Li’V :i ls vafdr fd;k x;k gS] tks f=&lnL;h;
dfeVh dh tkap ls feyrk gS rFkk mDr 16 vH;fFkZ;ksa ds ekeys esa fpfUgr
rFkk fdu&fdu dfeZ;ksa dh lafyIrrk gS] muds Lohd`fr c;ku ls Li’V
gksrk gS fd tSls MkVk vkfn esa lq/kkj] Mh0Vh0vkj0 iUuk psat dj ftYncan
fd;k x;k] mu lHkh dfeZ;ksa dk uke frokjh }kjk iz'ukoyh fpfUgr fd;s
x;s lHkh dfeZ;ksa dk iqfyl }kjk dkWy fMVsYl dh tkap dh x;h] tks lgh
ik;k x;kA ftlesa budk uke mYys[k ugha gSA Jh dqekj&1 }kjk vius
tokc esa tkWp inkf/kdkjh ds le{k fn, x;s cpko c;ku ds vfrfjDr dqN
u;k rF; izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa muds }kjk lefiZr
f}rh; dkj.k i`PNk dk tokc Lohdkj ;ksX; ugha ik;k x;k gSA
9- mi;qZDr lHkh rF;ksa ls Li’V gS fd buds }kjk vius in dk
nq:i;ksx dj diVrkiwoZd lfefr ds vfHkys[k ds lkFk voS/k :i ls
NsMNkM djrs gq, /kks[kk/kMh ls futh LokFkZ esa lfefr dks xqejkg fd;k x;k
rFkk BETET&2011 ijh{kk ds ifj.kke esa dEI;wVj lsy esa la/kkfjr MkVk esa
rFkk vad fu;kstu iath ds lkFk NsMNkM djus esa lafyIrrk ik;k x;kA
buds }kjk mDr tkylkth d`R;ksa ls lfefr dh izfr"Bk dks xgjk vk?kkr
igqapk gS] tks dk;Zfgr ,oa iz'kklfud n`f’Vdks.k ls drbZ Lohdkj ;ksX; ugha
gSA mudk vkpj.k ljdkjh dfeZ;ksa ds fy, cuk;h x;h vkpj.k lafgrk ds
loZFkk izfrdwy gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa Jh dqekj&1 dks lfefr dh lsok esa cuk;s
j[kuk lfefr ds fgr esa ugha gSA
10- vr% mi;qZDr of.kZr lHkh rF;ksa ,oa dkxtkrksa dh leh{kksijkar
lE;d~ fopkjksijkar Jh lqthr dqekj&1] lgk;d ¼fuyafcr½ ds }kjk lefiZr
f}rh; dkj.k i`PNk ds tokc dks vLohd`r dj vkns'kkuqlkj] Jh dqekj&1
dks fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr fofu;ekoyh&1964 ds v/;k;&10 dh
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
13/27
dafMdk&50 dh mi dafMdk&¼vi½ esa fufgr izko/kku ds vkyksd esa rRdky
izHkko ls lfefr dh lsok ls vfuok;Z lsokfuo`fr ¼Compulsory
Retirement½ dk naM fn;k tkrk gSA fuyacu vof/k esa Jh dqekj&1 dks
thou fuokZg HkRrk ds vfrfjDr dqN Hkh ns; ugha gksxkA
8. Thereafter, both the petitioners preferred
appeals against the impugned order of punishment before the
Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board. However, since the
aforesaid appeals were not being decided, the petitioners moved
this Court in C.W.J.C. No.6839 of 2024 (petitioner- Michael
Francis) and C.W.J.C. No.6940 of 2024 (petitioner – Sujeet
Kumar). A coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated
28.11.2024 and 12.12.2024 respectively disposed of the said
writ petitions with a direction to the respondent authorities to
decided the appeals preferred by the petitioners. Thereafter, the
aforesaid appeals came to be dismissed by the appellate
authority vide impugned orders dated 19.12.2024 and
08.01.2025.
9. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners, at
the outset, submits that the disciplinary proceeding conducted in
the case of the present petitioners suffers from grave procedural
errors, inasmuch as, despite making an express request for the
list of documents based on which the charges have been levelled
against the petitioners, no such document was ever provided to
the petitioners.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
14/27
10. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners
further submits that the memo of charge does not contain the list
of witnesses or the list of documents, which is in complete
violation of Rule 17(3) of the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005 and the
same has caused prejudiced to the petitioners in reasonably
defending themselves.
11. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners
has categorically submitted that the F.I.R. bearing Kotwali P.S.
Case No.452 of 2018 was registered on the basis of the
preliminary enquiry conducted by a Three Men Committee
comprising of the Chief Vigilance Officer, who subsequently,
was appointed as the Enquiry Officer in the disciplinary
proceedings. It is, therefore, the submission of learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioners that since the aforesaid officer had
already conducted the preliminary enquiry, he could not have
acted in the capacity of Enquiry Officer in the department
proceeding as it is well settled that no one should be a Judge in
his own cause (nemo judex in causa sua). The Enquiry Officer,
in the departmental proceeding, has placed considerable reliance
on the preliminary report prepared by Three Men Committee
constituted by the Board, which is thoroughly misplaced since
the aforesaid report itself was prepared by the Chief Vigilance
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
15/27
Officer himself, who has now stepped into the shoes of Enquiry
Officer and was in fact enquiring into his own report.
12. It has been submitted by learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioners that the written statement of defense
was required to be considered by the disciplinary authority
before initiating the departmental proceeding but, in the present
case, no such written statement/defence of the petitioner was
sought by the disciplinary authority and it is the Enquiry Officer,
who for the first time, directed the petitioner to submit his
defence, which is in violation of Rule-17(4) of the Bihar CCA
Rules, 2005.
13. Lastly, it has been submitted by learned
Senior Counsel for the petitioners that the Enquiry Officer has
placed heavy reliance on the confessional statement of accused-
Vijay Kumar Tiwari @ Tiwari and his statement was recorded in
the form of questionnaire while he was in police custody, but the
petitioners have not been afforded an opportunity to cross-
examine the aforesaid witness during the departmental
proceeding. Further, call records between the petitioners and the
accused of Kotwali P.S. Case No.452 of 2018 forms a central
basis for arriving at a finding of guilt in the departmental
proceeding, however, the call records have neither been
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
16/27
produced much less proved in the departmental proceeding.
14. By making the aforesaid submissions, it has
been argued by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners
that the disciplinary proceedings leading to dismissal and
voluntary retirement of the petitioners respectively suffers from
grave procedural lapses and deserves to be quashed.
15. Per contra, it has been submitted by learned
counsel for the Bihar School Examination Board that no
prejudice was caused to the petitioners in the enquiry
proceeding as they were afforded sufficient opportunity to
defend their cases in line with the principles of natural justice
and only thereafter, the punishment has been imposed upon the
petitioners.
16. In the counter affidavits filed by the
answering respondents, the facts leading to initiation of
departmental proceeding and punishment of the petitioners have
been mentioned. Apart from the aforesaid facts, it has been
stated that initially the petitioners were issued show-cause
notices for their unauthorized absence from their duties, to
which the petitioner did not respondent. Thereafter, it was
detected that a fraud was committed upon the Board and by
adopting fraudulent means changes were made in the tabulation
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
17/27
register and computer data containing the result of BETET, 2011
and accordingly, the F.I.R. was instituted against some accused
person including the employees of the Board. In course of the
investigation of F.I.R., some persons were arrested, who
disclosed the names of the petitioners to be involved in the
fraudulent changes in the result of BETET, 2011. Thereafter in
contemplation of the disciplinary proceeding, the petitioners
were suspended and memo of charge was served to them. After
following due process of law, the punishment has been awarded
to the petitioners considering the gravity of the charges.
17. It has also been stated in the counter affidavit
that the impugned orders have been passed strictly in
accordance with the statutory Regulations of the Bihar School
Examination Board. The Board, being an autonomous body, is
constituted under the Bihar School Examination Board Act,
1952. Section 17 of the aforesaid Act deals with the power of
the Board to make Regulation consistent with the Act and
accordingly, Regulations had been framed by the Board i.e. the
Bihar School Examination Board Regulation, 1964. Further,
chapter X of the aforesaid Regulation deals with service statutes
for its employees wherein under Regulation 28 provides that
save as otherwise provided in the Regulation the provisions of
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
18/27
Bihar Service Code and Government Servant Conduct Rules,
mutatis mutandis will apply to the employees of the Board.
18. So far as the contention of the petitioners that
the memo of charge was defective in absence of list of witnesses
is concerned, it has been submitted that the disciplinary
proceeding against the petitioner was conducted in terms of
Regulation of the Board and the petitioner was served with a
detailed charge sheet and they have been given ample
opportunity to defend their cases in the inquiry.
19. I have considered the submissions of the
parties and perused the materials on record.
20. From the records, it appears that a
departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioners
primarily on the allegation that they were unauthorizedly absent
from their duties and for their involvement/role in tempering
with the results of the BETET, 2011, for which a criminal case
bearing Kotwali P.S. Case No.452 of 2018 was also registered.
21. From the perusal of the memo of charge and
enquiry report, it appears that the accused persons in the
aforesaid F.I.R. in their statements have taken the name of these
petitioners to be specifically involved in tampering with the
result. Further, the Enquiry Officer has also placed reliance on
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
19/27
the call records of the accused persons, however, the same has
neither been produced nor proved in the departmental
proceeding. Moreover, the memo of charge issued to the
petitioners does not contain the list of witnesses and the
petitioners were not afforded an opportunity to cross-examine
the witnesses who had been questioned by way of a
questionnaire in the police custody.
22. The Bihar CCA Rules, 2005 provides for
mandatory statutory safeguards, such as, providing list of
witness and documents in support of the charges while framing
a memo of charge. Further, in the departmental proceeding, the
delinquent may cross-examine the witness(s).
23. The Chapter – X of the Bihar School
Examination Board Regulations, 1964 deals with service
Statute. Regulation 54 provides for framing of memorandum of
charges and holding of oral enquiry. A coordinate Bench of this
Court in the case of Jagdish Sah vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
reported as 2011 SCC OnLine Pat 1148 had the occasion to
consider the aforesaid Regulations of the Board in a similar
circumstances where mandatory procedures were not followed.
The coordinate Bench had categorically held that even under the
Regulations of the Board, the memo of charge must be
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
20/27
accompanied with the list of documents and list of witnesses.
24. The relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid
judgment in the case of Jagdish Sah (supra) read as under:-
“12. It may be appropriate at this stage to consider
Regulations 53 and 54(a) & (b), which are
quoted below:-
“53. Procedure for punishment.— When an
employee is charged with an offence,
every opportunity should be given to
defend himself and following procedure
should be strictly observed
(a) A memo of charges should be issued
against him;
(b) A written statement of the defence if
any offered should be obtained
from him;
(c) An oral enquiry should be held, in
respect of cases involving the
penalty of reduction, removal or
dismissal from service, and
(d) An order should be passed
embodying the findings of the
punishing authority.
54. Framing of Memorandum of charges :
holding of oral enquiry and drafting of
punishment order.—
(a) The following instructions should be
observed in framing a
memorandum of charges—
(1) The grounds on which it is
proposed to take action
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
21/27
against an employee
should be reduced to the
form of definite charge or
charges.
(2) A statement of the allegations
on which each charge is
based and of any other
circumstances which it is
proposed to take into
consideration in passing
orders on the case, should
invariably be recorded in
the memorandum. In no
circumstances, however,
should an opinion or
anything that can be
constructed as an opinion
as to the guilt of the
employee appear in the
memorandum.
(3) The employee should be
required, within a
reasonable time to be
specified in the
memorandum, to put in a
written statement of his
defence. He should also be
required to state whether he
desires to be heard in
person, in respect of cases
involving the punishment of
reduction, removal or
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
22/27
dismissal from service.
(b) The circumstances in which an oral
enquiry has to be held and the
manner in which it should be
conducted, are detailed below:—
(1) If the employee who has been
charged with an offence
involving the punishment of
reduction, removal or
dismissal from service,
desires to be heard in
person, an oral enquiry
must be held. It is also open
to the punishing authority
to direct that an oral
enquiry should be held,
even if the employee does
not ask for it.
(2) At the oral enquiry it is
incumbent on the authority
concerned to have oral
evidence as to such of the
allegations as are not
admitted and to give the
employee charged an
opportunity (a) to cross-
examine the witnesses, (b)
to give evidence in person,
and (c) to have such
witnesses called as he may
wish provided that the
officer conducting the
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
23/27
enquiry may, for special
and sufficient reason to be
recorded in writing refuse
to call a witness.
(3) The proceeding of the oral
enquiry should be reduced
to writing and be signed by
the enquiring officer and
the employee charged.”
13. It is evident from the aforesaid statutory
regulations that issuance of memo of charge is
a mandatory requirement therein and the
requirement of submitting list of witnesses and
list of documents on which the employer
proposes to rely in proving the said charge
follow as a matter of course. It is also provided
that an oral enquiry should be held where the
punishment of reduction, removal or dismissal
from service are involved.
14. The submission of learned counsel for the
respondent Board that the petitioner had waived
the requirement by not stating in his written
statement of defence or thereafter that he desires
to be heard in person has no legs to stand in
view of the mandatory nature of the provisions
regarding holding of oral enquiry. It is not for
the proceedee to suo motu state as to whether he
wishes to be heard in person but for the
disciplinary authority to ensure that he is
required to state whether he desires to be heard
in person where a major punishment is to be
given to him. There is nothing in the material on
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
24/27
the record to show that the petitioner was ever
required to state whether he desires to be heard
in person. In fact, it has been kept open to the
punishing authority to direct that oral enquiry
should be held even if the employee does not ask
for it. Thus it is evident from the said provisions
that the requirement of oral enquiry in case of
major punishment is to be treated as mandatory
unless the employee on being given an
opportunity specifically states that he does not
desire to be heard in person. There is nothing on
the record to show that the petitioner at any time
has stated that he did not desire to be heard in
person. In the said circumstances, there can be
no question of any waiver by the petitioner of a
right which he was at no time asked to exercise
in terms of the statutory provisions.
15. Moreover, this Court is of the view that it
cannot be held in the present case that any
departmental enquiry for major punishment
has been held. It is only in the case of minor
punishment that a show cause may be asked
from an employee and upon receipt of his reply
the disciplinary authority may pass an order
inflicting punishment on not being satisfied
with the same but when a major punishment is
to be inflicted it is incumbent upon the enquiry
officer to fix a date directing the petitioner to
appear before him and even if the employer
does not intend to examine any witness and to
rely only upon documents, the petitioner must
be given an opportunity to show that those
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
25/27
documents did not point towards his guilt and
cannot be relied upon in support of the charge.
In the present matter, no such notice was
issued to the petitioner to appear before the
enquiry officer and everything has been done
behind the back of the petitioner depriving him
of the opportunity to examine and assail the
documents which have been relied upon by the
enquiry officer and also the opportunity to
produce his own witnesses or to give evidence
in person. Thus, the enquiry proceedings have
to be held to be vitiated and not to be relied
upon for passing any order of punishment.
16. Lastly, there is substantial force in the
submission of learned counsel for the
petitioner that the documents which were not
mentioned in the charge memo cannot be
relied upon for holding the charges to be
proved. It is evident that in the present matter
the petitioner was not made aware of the
documents on which the respondent-Board
intended to rely upon for proving the charges
as no list of documents was supplied to the
petitioner either with the charge memo or at
any subsequent stage. In this regard, it makes
no difference that the petitioner had perused
certain documents. Thus the findings of the
enquiry officer has to be held to be based on no
evidence. The petitioner having been unaware
of the documents, in the light of the decision of
the Apex Court in the case of Kuldeep Singh
(supra), all those documents have to be
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
26/27
excluded from consideration and they cannot
be relied upon or even referred to by the
disciplinary authority.”
25. Therefore, it is patently clear that both under
the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005 as well as under the Regulations of
1964, it is mandatory that the memo of charge must accompany
the list of documents as well as list of witnesses in support of
the charges. It is also clear that the opportunity to the delinquent
to cross-examine the witnesses is necessary to uphold the
fairness and non-arbitrariness in the departmental proceedings.
However, in the present case, neither the memo of charge
contains the list of witness/documents nor the petitioners were
given an opportunity to cross-examine the witness(s), who had
deposed against them. Moreover, the call records which was
relied heavily in the enquiry report is neither produced nor
proved in the departmental proceedings. Therefore, this Court is
of the considered opinion that on the aforesaid grounds the
disciplinary proceeding stands vitiated.
26. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ram Prakash Singh, reported in
2025 SCC OnLine SC 891 has held once a departmental
proceeding is found to be vitiated on procedural grounds and the
Court sets aside an order of punishment then the correct course
Patna High Court CWJC No.3604 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
27/27
would be to remit back the matter for fresh consideration.
27. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned
orders of punishment contained in memo nos. 66 and 67 dated
16.01.2024 as well as the appellate orders dated 19.12.2024 and
08.01.2025 are quashed in both the cases. The matter is
remanded back to the respondent-Board for fresh consideration
of the matter from the stage of issuance of memo of charge.
28. With the aforesaid observations and
directions, these writ petitions are allowed to the above extent.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE 13.10.2025
Uploading Date 09.01.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…