Revenue Clerk dismissed for consuming liquor at office; enquiry relied only on breath analyzer report and seizure memo without examining any witnesses. Court held findings unsustainable, quashed dismissal and appellate order, and directed reinstatement with consequential benefits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1087 of 2024
======================================================
Chandra Shekhar Yadav Son of Late Ramdeo Yadav, Resident of VillageKamar Pokhar, Police Station- Baheri, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundaram, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (28)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 18-06-2025
This petition has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 17.12.2022 i.e. Annexure –
P/7 passed by the District Magistrate – cum- Collector, Madhubani, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been dismissed from services and also under challenge is the order dated 12.01.2023 i.e. Annexure – P/8 passed by the appellate authority, whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the petitioner has also been rejected.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1087 of 2024 dt.18-06-2025 2/5
office Madhepur, Madhubani. It is alleged that on 06.11.2021 the petitioner along with two other employees had consumed liquor in the office. Madhepur P.S. Case No. 178 of 2021 was registered against the petitioner, who was taken in custody on 06.11.2021 and subsequently granted bail. The charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner and enquiry officer was appointed. The enquiry officer in his report found all the charges levelled against the petitioner to be correct. On the basis of the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority vide impugned order dated 17.12.2022 dismissed the petitioner from services. The above order of dismissal has been challenged by the petitioner by way of Service Appeal No. 01 of 2023 before the appellate authority which has also been dismissed by the appellate authority vide its order dated 17.06.2023 i.e. Annexure – P/9. Hence, this writ petition.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1087 of 2024 dt.18-06-2025 3/5
enquiry officer only on the basis of the breath analyzer test report arrived on the conclusion that at the time of the incident the petitioner was in intoxicated condition. He further submits that the enquiry officer only on the basis of seizure memo arrived on the conclusion that at the time of incident some liquor was found in possession of the petitioner. Since, no witnesses were examined in this regard and only on the basis of seizure memo the enquiry officer made his opinion, it is perverse. According to the counsel, it is the case of no evidence. He further submits that only on the basis of breath analyzer test report it cannot be said that at the relevant point of time the petitioner was in intoxicated condition. Reliance is also placed by the counsel on the judgment passed by this court in the case of Manoj Kumar Pandey vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. passed in CWJC No. 10484 of 2023 dated 10.01.2025.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1087 of 2024 dt.18-06-2025 4/5
witnesses were prepared nor any witness has been examined by the enquiry officer during the course of the enquiry proceedings. The enquiry officer relied only upon the breath analyzer test report annexed with the charge memo. There is nothing on record which shows that who was the person who brought on record the breath analyzer report before the enquiry officer and there is also nothing on record that in what manner the breath analyzer report has been proved by the presenting officer during the course of enquiry. In the case of Manoj Kumar Pandey (supra) , this court has already held that the report of the breath analyzer test is not a conclusive proof of consumption of liquor.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1087 of 2024 dt.18-06-2025 5/5
sustainable in the eyes of law. While passing the order of dismissal the disciplinary authority as well as while deciding the appeal the appellate authority did not consider these aspects.
(Arvind Singh Chandel , J)
Siddharth Soni/-
| AFR/NAFR |
|---|
| CAV DATE |
| Uploading Date |
| Transmission Date |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether dismissal based on an enquiry where no witnesses were examined, resting only on breath analyzer report and seizure memo, was sustainable.
Whether the appellate authority erred in affirming the order of dismissal despite the enquiry being vitiated.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Manoj Kumar Pandey vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.Followed¶6
CWJC No. 10484 of 2023 dated 10.01.2025
Chandra Shekhar Yadav
The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
The Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
The Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga
The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Madhubani
The Sub-Divisional Officer, Jhanjhapur, Madhubani
Arvind Singh Chandel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
