Bipin Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.568 of 2022

¶3

In

¶4

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6429 of 2008

¶5

======================================================

¶6

Bipin Kumar Singh, S/o Late Kuldeep Narayan Singh, R/o – Village - Shukhpur Dyordhi, P.O. - Shukhpur Dyordhi, P.S. - Supaul, District - Supaul. At present residing at Mohalla - Dani Bigha, P.O. - Dani Bigha, P.S. - Aurangabad Town, District - Aurangabad.

¶7

... ... Appellant/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar.

¶10

The District and Session Judge, Aurangabad.

¶11

The Sub-Judge III-cum-Judge Incharge, Civil Court, Aurangabad.

¶12

¶13

The 5th Additional District and Session Judge, Aurangabad.

¶14

The Additional District and Session Judge, (F.T.C. V), Aurangabad.

¶15

The Additional District and Session Judge, (F.T.C. IV), Aurangabad.

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

======================================================

¶18

Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 : Mr. Piyush Lall, Advocate

¶19

======================================================

¶20

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and

¶21

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 17-02-2025

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment

¶24

Patna High Court L.P.A No.568 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025 2/4

¶25

dated 22.08.2022 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6429 of 2008, whereby the punishment inflicted upon the appellant has not been interfered with.

¶26

It appears from the records that the appellant, who was a Bench Clerk-cum-Office Clerk of Fast Track Court No. IV, Aurangabad, was placed under suspension and was proceeded against departmentally for

¶27

having burnt 111 Court records. After following the procedure, the appellant was visited with the consequence of penalty of reduction of pay-scale of Rs. 4000 – 6000/- to Rs. 3050 – 4590/-.

¶28

The contention of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that the Presenting Officer was not appointed. Apart from this, it has been submitted

¶29

that such reduction of salary, in perpetuity, is not contemplated in the departmental rules with respect to imposition of punishment.

¶30

The learned Single Judge found from the

¶31

Patna High Court L.P.A No.568 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025 3/4

¶32

averments made on behalf of the respondents that the Inquiry Officer as also the Presenting Officer were appointed and the departmental proceeding was held in accordance with the rules.

¶33

The contention of the appellant before the

¶34

learned Single Judge that the appointment of the Presenting Officer or the Inquiry Officer was not communicated to him was repelled on the ground that there was no such requirement under the rules governing the case of the appellant, namely, the Bihar Civil Court Staffs (Class III and Class IV) Rules, 1998.

¶35