IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13027 of 2024 ====================================================== Dhirendra Kumar Singh @ Dheeraj Son of Sri Ram Naresh Singh, R/o Village- Mangurahan, Post - Nawada, P.S. Masharakh, District- Chhapra (Saran), Bihar, Pin - 841417. Presently posted as Assistant Section Officer, Information and Tachnology Department, Bihar, Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Additional Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Under Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Chairman-cum-Member, Revenue Board, Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.P.N. Shahi, Sr. Adv. Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Pandit, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (7) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 23-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed with the following reliefs:- I. For setting aside the punishment order bearing memo No. 20708 dated 07/11/2023 (annexure-P/8) issued under signature of Under Secretary, General Administration Department, Bihar, Patna in departmental proceeding conducted against the petitioner in the light of memo of Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 2/10 charge (prapatra- ka) issued vide memo No. 02 dated 02/01/2023 by the Urban Development & Housing Department, Bihar, Patna whereby and where under the petitioner, the then Assistant, Urban Development and Housing Department, presently Information Technology Department, Bihar, Patna has been awarded punishment of 'censure' and withholding of 03 annual increments with cumulative effect under the provisions of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 2005. II. For setting aside the appellate order dated 23/07/2024 (annexure -P/10) passed in Service Appeal Case No. 33 of 2023 by the Chairman-cum-Member, Revenue Board, Bihar, Patna whereby and where under punishment order awarded by the disciplinary authority has been affirmed by rejecting the service appeal filed by the petitioner without applying his independent mind on the appeal application filed by the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was working as an Assistant Section Officer at that relevant period of time in the Urban Development and Housing Department and one Shiva Shankar Singh was subject to Vigilance P.S. Case No.54 of 2022 lodged under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(B) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for accumulating money apart from his income. It has been Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 3/10 alleged that on 21.10.2022, the vigilance team started searching the house of the Shiva Shankar Singh, where his son Akash Kumar was present, then on the mobile of Akash Kumar, a message through Whatsapp has been received in which one letter of Urban Development and Housing Department relating to the said complain has been found. After inquiry, Akash Kumar said that one Dheeraj Singh had taken Rs.15,000/- for giving this document. It was relating to the complaint against his father. Subsequently, the raiding team reached at the Urban Development and Housing Department, Patna along with Akash Kumar, who recognized Dheeraj Singh (the petitioner) and said that he was getting the said documents from him after payment of Rs.15,000/-. Thereafter, on the basis of same material fact, Special Vigilance P.S. Case No.56 of 2022 was lodged against the petitioner under Section 7/8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The petitioner was arrested on 21.10.2022 and remanded in judicial custody in the said case. But subsequently, he was granted bail on 02.12.2022. He further submits that the charges were levelled against the petitioner vide Memo No.3533 dated 20.02.2023 and summary of charges has been served upon the petitioner. 4. Senior counsel further submits that as per the Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 4/10 charge memo, there were four charges alleged and direction was made to submit his reply and the petitioner has submitted his reply to the same, which followed initiation of the departmental inquiry. In the departmental inquiry, no witnesses were examined, no documents were produced before the departmental inquiry. In result, the Inquiry Officer has exonerated the petitioner from 3 charges out of 4 and found only one charge proved against the petitioner. 5. Senior counsel further submits that the first charge is only relating to filing of the FIR whereas Charge No.2, 3 & 4 are relating to the description made in the charge. He further submits that filing of the FIR cannot be a charge, it may be a fact and contents of charges, which are part of Charge No.2, 3 & 4, was not found proved. 6. Senior counsel further submits that the Disciplinary Authority was agreed on the allegations made in the inquiry report that is to say that against one charge, he proceeded and issued show-cause to him. The petitioner has responded on the said second show-cause thereafter, final order has been passed in which the petitioner was imposed punishment of censure and stoppage of three annual increments with cumulative effect, which are major punishment. Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 5/10 7. Senior counsel further submits that in the appeal, this point has been raised, but the same was rejected thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Hon’ble Court. 8. Senior counsel on the point of law submits that at the time of passing order, the Disciplinary Authority has ignored the established rule laid down under Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rule, 2005 and submits that on the one hand, out of 4 charges, 3 charges in which content of the FIR has to be proved, were not proved, but only the fact that FIR has been lodged, was proved on the basis of which punishment has been imposed which is bad in law. 9. Senior counsel further submits that the allegation which is content of the FIR has not been proved and only filing of the FIR has been said to be proved by the Inquiry Officer on the basis of which punishment cannot be imposed. Therefore, he submits that the finding of Disciplinary Authority is absolutely in violation of Rule laid down under Rule 18 of the Bihar CCA Rule, 2005 and the Appellate Authority has also not considered the same. It is due to this reason, the original order as well as appellate order, both orders may be set aside. 10. In response thereof, learned counsel for the State Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 6/10 submits that there is no need of any interference in the order passed by the Original Authority as well as the Appellate Authority. He further submits that the argument made by Senior counsel for the petitioner is correct upto that extent that out of 4 charges, 3 charges have not been proved and only one charge has been proved. He further submits that filing of the FIR has been proved and it is sufficient that criminal case has been lodged against the petitioner, which is still pending awaiting trial considering that the punishment should be imposed under the departmental proceeding. He further submits that at worst, the result of departmental proceeding be kept pending till finalization of the criminal case, prior to that the decision of the departmental proceeding may not be set aside. 11. Counsel further submits that it may be decided that the decision of the departmental proceeding may be touched after the decision of the criminal case. 12. After hearing the arguments of both the parties, this Court reached on the conclusion that on the finding of the Inquiry Officer, both parties have agreed. The alleged 4 charges against the petitioner are stated as follows:- 1. पुललस अधीकक, लनगरानी अनवेषण बयूरो, पटना के i=kad 2967 लदनांक 01.11.2022 दारा izfrosfnr लकया गया है लक लनगरानी थाना काणड संखया 54/2022 के मुखय अलभयुकत Jh लशव शंकर लसंह, कनीय Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 7/10 अलभयनता, नगर लनगम, पूलणरयाँ को लवभागीय गोपनीय संलचका से संबंलधत कागजात उनके iq= से 15000/- ( iUnzg हजार) रपये लेकर वाट्सएप के माधयम से उपलबध कराने संबंधी लरशवत लेने के आरोप मे लदनांक 21.10.2022 को लनगरानी अनवेषण बयूरो, पटना दारा धारा-7/8 Hkz ०लन०अलध०, 1988 ( संशोलधत अलधलनयम 2018) एवं धारा-217 भा०द०लव० के तहत Jh /khjsUnz कु मार लसंह, लबहार सलचवालय सहायक, नगर लवकास एवं आवास लवभाग, लबहार, पटना को लगरफतार कर माननीय लवशेष नयायाधीश, लनगरानी पटना के नयायालय मे izLrqr लकया गया, जहाँ से आदेशानुसार उनहे नयालयक लहरासत मे dsUnzh; कारा, वेऊर, पटना भेजा गया। Jh /khjsUnz कु मार लसंह, सहायक के उकत कृ तय के ललए धारा- 7/8 Hkz ०लन०अलध०, 1988 ( संशोलधत अलधलनयम 2018) एवं धारा-217 भा०द०लव० के तहत लनगरानी थाना काणड संखया 56/2022 लदनांक 21.10.2022 दजर है। 2. लनगरानी अनवेषण बयूरो, लबहार, पटना दारा लनगरानी थाना काणड संखया 54/2022 लदनांक 20.10.2022 के izkFkfedh अलभयुकत Jh लशव शंकर लसंह, कनीय अलभयनता, नगर लनगम, पूलणरयाँ के पटना लसथत फलैट संखया 102, राणा रेसीडेनसी अपाटरमेनट, रायजी की गली, थाना Jh कृ षणापुरी, बोलरंग कै नाल रोड, पटना मे लदनांक 21.10.2022 को तलाशी के दौरान izkFkfedh अलभयुकत Jh लशव शंकर लसंह के iq= आकाश कु मार के Apple I Phone 13 ( मोबाईल सं० 9102087456) के वाट्सऐप मैसेज को चेक लकया गया लजससे यह जात हुआ लक izkFkfedh अलभयुकत Jh लशव शंकर लसंह ने अपने iq= आकाश कु मार को मोबाईल सं० 8507662240 से मैसेज भेजते हुए लकसी धीरज लसंह से लमलकर 15000 / र० लरशवत की एवज मे लवभागीय कागजात को वहाट्सऐप मैसेज करने को कहा। izkFkfedh अलभयुकत Jh लशव शंकर लसंह के iq= आकाश कु मार ने उकत कागजात को अपने वहाट्सऐप मैसेज से लपताजी ( लशवशंकर लसंह) के मोबाईल नं0 9431865314 के वहाट्सऐप पर भेज लदया। izkFkfedh अलभयुकत Jh लशव शंकर लसंह के पुत्र आकाश कु मार ने 15000/50 लरशवत के रप मे लेने वाले Jh धीरज कु मार Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 8/10 की पहचान की है। वहाट्सऐप दारा भेजी गई संलचका संखया 09/ न०लव०/पलर०-63/19 के पृषठ 36 पर अंलकत कागजात वही कागजात पाये गये जो वहाट्सऐप मैसेज मे है। मूल संलचका Jh /khjsUnz कु मार लसंह की कसटडी मे है, इसका सतयापन iz”kk[kk पदालधकारी Jh राजेश कु मार लतवारी दारा लकया गया। लजस कागजात को वहाट्सऐप के माधयम से उपलबध कराया गया उससे अलभयुकत Jh लशव शंकर लसंह सजग हो गये एवं अपने लवरद izR;kuqikfrd धनाजरन से संबंलधत जाँच को izHkkfor करने मे सफल हो सके । 3. लबहार सलचवालय अनुदेश के लनयम 3.10 (1) के izko/kkukuqlkj सलचवालय कमरचारी की हैलसयत से izkIr बातो की जानकारी पूणरतः गोपनीय समझी और रखी जायेगी लकनतु Jh /khjsUnz कु मार लसंह, सहायक, नगर लवकास एवं आवास लवभाग, लबहार, पटना के कृ तय दारा अवैध तरीके से लवभाग की महतवपूणर सूचना लीक की गई है। 4. Jh /khjsUnz कु मार लसंह, लबहार सलचवालय सहायक, नगर लवकास एवं आवास लवभाग, लबहार, पटना का यह कृ तय लबहार सरकारी सेवक आचार लनयमावली 1976 के लनयम 03 (1) (i), (ii), (iii) के izfrdwy है। 13. It is also admitted by both of them that out of 4 charges, 3 charges were not proved and only one charge that is Charge No.1, lodging of the FIR has been proved. It is well- known that the criminal jurisprudence and service jurisprudence have two horizon. The proof of criminal jurisprudence is beyond all reasonable doubts and in the service jurisprudence, it is preponderance of probability. This Court of the view that the question of preponderance of probability shall be available when the particular fact shall be placed before the Court that is to say that the content of FIR must have been placed before the Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 9/10 Inquiry Officer through the mouth of the person who has made the complaint. 14. Here in the present case, the person who has made allegation in the complaint on the basis of which the FIR has been lodged, has not been produced before the Inquiry Officer. The stand of the State is that mere filing of the FIR should be treated as the gospel truth of the informant who has narrated the Fardbeyan cannot be accepted legally. It is due to this reason, this Court is of the firm view that the Charge No.1 i.e., filing of the FIR may be proved, but this cannot be the conclusion for preponderance of probability to be against the petitioner as it is gross violation of the rules laid down under Bihar CCA Rule, 2005. There is not single witness nor the person nor the mobile were produced or any witness narrates about that and it is due to this reason, this Court hereby set aside the punishment order bearing memo No. 20708 dated 07/11/2023 (Annexure-P/8) issued under signature of the Secretary, General Administration Department, Bihar and the appellate order dated 23/07/2024 (Annexure -P/10) passed in Service Appeal Case No. 33 of 2023 by the Chairman-cum-Member, Revenue Board, Bihar, both are hereby set aside. 15. If the petitioner shall be convicted then the Patna High Court CWJC No.13027 of 2024 dt.23-07-2026 10/10 Respondent Authorities are free to take action against him in accordance with law. 16. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the present writ petition stands allowed. Prakashmani/- (Dr. Anshuman, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 28/07/2026 Transmission Date NA