Kumari Ranjani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.619 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3055 of 2017 ====================================================== Kumari Ranjani W/o Shri Vikas Kumar Srivastava R/o Village and P.O.- Bharauli, Bhaya-Narendrapur, P.S.-Andar, District-Siwan ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Divisional Commissioner Saran at Chapra 3.

The District Magistrate Siwan 4.

The Enquiry Officer-cum-Additional Collector Siwan 5.

The Circle Officer Siswan, District-Siwan ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh Mr. Akhilesh Kr. Sinha Mr. Shyama Kant Singh, Advocates For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.C. to AAG 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR) Date : 24-02-2021 Heard the parties.

Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 19.04.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No.3055 of 2017 passed by learned Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court dismissing the writ petition, the appellant has preferred this LPA. Appellant had filed writ petition for setting aside the order dated 9.1.2016 passed in Service Appeal No. 318 of 2014 passed by Commissioner, Saran at Chapra / appellate authority rejecting the representation of appellant to reconsider quantum of punishment pursuant to direction issued by this Court vide

Patna High Court L.P.A No.619 of 2019 dt.24-02-2021 2/3 order dated 06.10.2015 passed in CWJC No.15794 of 2015 to the appellate authority, the Commissioner, Saran, Chapra to reconsider the quantum of punishment as to whether the order of dismissal can be substituted by compulsory retirement. Appellant had earlier filed writ petition being CWJC No. 15794 of 2015 challenging the order of dismissal passed by the Collector, disciplinary authority and affirmed by the Commissioner, Appellate Authority. This court in its order dated 6.10.

2015 did not interfere with the finding of disciplinary authority in which charges against the appellant stood proved and same was affirmed by the appellate authority, however, on issue of quantum of punishment, direction was issued to appellate authority to re-consider it, if the order of dismissal could be substituted by order of compulsory retirement. However, the appellate authority reconsidered the issue of quantum of punishment awarded to appellant but did not find the punishment awarded disproportionate to the gravity of proven charges and found the punishment of dismissal from service to be just and proper and commensurate to the gravity of proved misconduct.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.619 of 2019 dt.24-02-2021 3/3 departmentally proceeded for misconduct.

The quantum of punishment to be awarded in a disciplinary proceeding for proven misconduct exclusively lies within the domain of the disciplinary authority/appellate authority/revisional authority and courts cannot substitute order of punishment but only can direct the disciplinary authority/appellate authority/revisional authority to re-consider the quantum of punishment, if same appears to be shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of proven misconduct. In present case, on the direction of this Court, the appellate authority has reconsidered the quantum of punishment awarded to appellant but did not find same fit to be substituted by order of compulsory retirement.

This Court does not find any error or infirmity in the order passed by learned Single Judge and, accordingly, this LPA is dismissed.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 17.03.2021 Transmission Date NA