Patna High Court
Sujit Kumar ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court set aside Memo No. 6602 as it was passed without considering the petitioner’s show‑cause reply, violating natural justice.
Summary
The petitioner, a data entry operator in the Bihar Transport Department, was terminated by Memo No. 6602 dated 08.08.2025 after an audit alleged a cash shortfall. He filed a show‑cause reply showing an excess deposit of Rs 2 and submitted 99 O‑GRAS challans, but his reply was not considered. He sought quashing of the memo, reinstatement with back wages, and a mandamus to verify the challans. The Patna High Court held that the memo was passed without affording a fair hearing and therefore set it aside. The Court directed the Joint Secretary to convene the concerned officers, consider a fresh representation by the petitioner, and issue a reasoned order within 90 days, and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether Memo No. 6602 dated 08.08.2025, issued without considering the petitioner’s show‑cause reply, violates principles of natural justice and can be quashed.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with back wages and continuity of service.
- Whether a mandamus can be issued directing the authorities to constitute a committee to physically verify the 99 O‑GRAS challans submitted by the petitioner.
Subjects
- natural justice
- show‑cause notice
- quashing order
- mandamus
- reinstatement
- public service
- audit objection
- government employee
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4220 of 2026
======================================================
Sujit Kumar Thakur Son of Kashi Thakur, Resident of - Ward No. 7, Ramdiri,
Nakttitola, P.S. - Matitari , District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Transport,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The State Transport Commissioner, Transport Department, Visveswaraya
Bhawan, Patna.
3. The Joint Secretary, Department of Transport, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.
5. The District Transport Officer (DTO), Rohtas at Sasaram.
6. Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Ltd. (BELTRON),
through its Managing Director, Beltron Bhawan, Shastri Nagar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mahendra Pd. Verma, AC to SC-20
For the BSEDC (Beltron) : Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Akash Anand, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 24-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the BSEDC
(Beltron).
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
(i) For Issuance of appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions
in the nature of CERTIORARI for quashing
Memo No. dated 05/Estt(Charge)-02-
02/2025-6602 08.08.2025 issued by the Joint
Secretary, Transport Department
(Respondent No. 3), whereby the Petitioner's
service was arbitrarily returned to BELTRON
Patna High Court CWJC No.4220 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
2/5
(terminated) based on an erroneous audit
objection.
(ii) For Issuance of appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions
in the nature to of MANDAMUS directing the
Respondents reinstate the Petitioner to the
post of Data Entry Operator at his last place
of posting (District Transport Office, Banka)
or any other suitable location, with full back
wages and continuity of service.
(iii) For Issuance of a Writ in the
nature of Mandamus directing the
Respondent Authorities, specifically
Respondent Nos. 2 and 5, to immediately
constitute a competent committee to
physically verify the 99 O-GRAS challans
submitted by the Petitioner in his presence,
and subsequently absolve him of the financial
liabilities arbitrarily imposed upon him."
(iv) For Issuance of appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions
to stay the operation of the Impugned Order
Memo No. 6602 dated 08.08.2025 during the
pendency of this instant writ and restrain
Respondent No. 6 (BELTRON) from taking
any coercive action against the Petitioner
based on the said order.
(v) Pass any other order(s) as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4220 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
3/5
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner joined his service at the District Transport Office,
Rohtas, in July 2016. He was previously posted at the District
Transport Office, Begusarai. Counsel further submits that the
petitioner’s work was to make entries of data in the computer at
the District Transport Office, Rohtas, for four years, and he
worked at Rohtas till 2021. Thereafter, he was relieved to join at
the office of the DTO, Khagaria. At the time of relieving, he
handed over all charges, including cash books, to the Head Clerk,
and no “No Dues” objection was raised.
4. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has been
issued a show-cause from the office of the DTO, Rohtas, alleging
by the audit team that a discrepancy for the period 01.03.2021 to
30.06.2021 has been found, with the allegation that there is a
discrepancy in the total calculation and total deposit, and there is
a shortfall. Counsel further submits that, after receiving the
show-cause, he immediately filed a reply, including a “Guard
File” analysis and a list of 99 O-GRAS (Online Government
Receipt Accounting System) challans.
5. Counsel further submits that in the said reply he has
demonstrated that against the calculation of Rs. 74,65,968/-, a
total sum of Rs. 74,65,970/- was deposited. This resulted in an
Patna High Court CWJC No.4220 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
4/5
excess deposit of Rs. 2/-, and hence no embezzlement has
occurred, however, his show-cause reply was not considered at
all, and instead thereof, Annexure-P/6, Memo No. 6602 dated
08.08.2025 has been issued without considering his explanation.
6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that filing of a reply is necessary.
7. From the order passed by the Joint Secretary,
Department of Transport, Government of Bihar, Patna, addressed
to the In-charge of Human Resources, Bihar State Electronics
Development Corporation Limited, Beltron Bhawan,
Shastrinagar, Patna, it transpires that the petitioner’s explanation
filed before the DTO, Rohtas, Sasaram has not been considered
at all.
8. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that
filing a counter-affidavit and keeping the writ petition pending
shall not serve the purpose. Consideration of the petitioner’s
show-cause, filed before the District Transport Office, Rohtas,
Sasaram, is the real solution.
9. The impugned order contained in Memo No. 6602,
dated 08.08.2025 has passed without considering show-cause.
Hence, the same is hereby set aside.
10. It is hereby directed to the Joint Secretary,
Patna High Court CWJC No.4220 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
5/5
Department of Transport, Government of Bihar, Patna
(respondent No. 3) to call the District Transport Officer, Rohtas,
Sasaram, along with the concerned D.E.O. and Programmer, and
then take a decision.
11. It is hereby directed to the petitioner to file a fresh
representation before the Joint Secretary, Department of
Transport, Government of Bihar, Patna (respondent No. 3), along
with a copy of this order, the show-cause notice, and the reply
thereto, within 30 days from today. Upon receipt of the same,
respondent No. 3, after hearing all concerned, shall pass a
reasoned and speaking order within 90 days thereafter.
12. It is made clear that the said 90 days shall be
counted from the date of appearance of all concerned.
13. Accordingly, in view of the above observations and
directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U
Checking your session…