salary, the requirement of Rule 97 of the Bihar Service Code and the law laid down in the case of Mahabir Prasad v. State of Bihar , 1988 PLJR 82, has not been followed and to that extent, the writ petition was allowed. However, with regard to imposing of punishment of censure, the learned Writ Court found that under the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005, the punishments have been classified into two categories, minor penalties and major penalties, and for the purpose of imposing minor penalty, the principles of law laid down in the case of Kunj Behari Misra (supra) need not be followed as the enquiry officer having exonerated the employee, by issuing a second show cause notice, the minor punishment could be imposed. In our considered view, this finding and the principles laid down by the learned Writ Court is not at all correct. Once for a punishment, be it major or minor, a departmental enquiry is conducted and the employee is exonerated of the charges levelled by the enquiry officer, if the disciplinary authority wants to disagree with the finding of the enquiry officer and record his own finding holding the employee guilty and, therefore, the law laid down in the case of Kunj Behari Misra ( supra) and in the case of S. P. Malhotra Vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors. [ (2013) 7 SCC 251] is very clear that the principles of natural
