IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.304 of 2025 ====================================================== Yogendra Prasad son of Late Phulena Sah, Resident of Mohalla- Purani Chowk, Ward No. 20, Sri Krishna Nagar, P.O. and P.S.- Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Health Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director-in-Chief, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj. 4. The Additional Chief Medical Officer cum Inquiry Officer, Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate Md. Farooq, Advocate Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, AC to GP-22 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 15-04-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed with the following reliefs: “i. For issuance of an appropriate Writ/Writs direction/directions in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the order dated 18/10/2024, issued by Respondent no.03, vide his office order Patna High Court CWJC No.304 of 2025 dt.15-04-2026 2/8 bearing memo no. 2321 whereby penalty of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect from 09/03/2019 was imposed upon the petitioner under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules and he was directed to deposit all illegal withdrawals with interest within 15 days. ii. Any other writ/writs, order/orders or direction/directions as the facts and circumstances of the case may require and deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court may also be issued.” 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order, which is impugned dated 18.10.2024, is absolutely a non-jurisdictional order as this order cannot be passed in a proceeding under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no wrong as alleged in the order. He submits that the departmental proceeding has been conducted absolutely in gross violation of the established Rule. There is violation of Rules 17(3) and 17(4) of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CCA Rules, 2005’). Subsequently, violation of Rules 17(14), Rule 18(2) and 18(3) of the CCA Rules, 2005. Counsel submits that upon appearance of Patna High Court CWJC No.304 of 2025 dt.15-04-2026 3/8 the petitioner in the departmental proceeding neither inquiry report has been submitted nor second show-cause has been demanded and final order has been passed. Learned Counsel further submits that the nature of the order which has been passed cannot be passed in a proceeding under 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. In support of his argument, he relied on the judgment passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Nawal Kishore Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and Others (CWJC No.226 of 2015) dated 09.08.2016, where the law has been laid down that no punishment order can be imposed with retrospective effect nor any punishment as envisaged under the CCA Rules, 2005 can be imposed on a retired employee. Counsel submits that the Hon’ble Full Bench has already decided that even though a proceeding initiated in service period can be continued post retirement, but the nature of punishment is different and no penalties as envisaged under the CCA Rules, 2005 can be imposed. Counsel submits that here in the present case, penalty has been imposed which is not permissible and, hence, on the point of law and the law decided by this Hon’ble Court, the petitioner is entitled for all the reliefs which have been mentioned hereinabove. 4. Learned Counsel for the State, on the other Patna High Court CWJC No.304 of 2025 dt.15-04-2026 4/8 hand, submits that the case of the petitioner is of different nature. He submits that the petitioner has committed fraud and by committing manipulation in the date of birth he had extended the date from 28.01.1961 to 28.01.1964 and it is due to this reason he has worked excessively, i.e., for about three years. Counsel submits that show-cause has been issued and he was directed to appear before the authority, but instead of appearance he had taken leave and never appeared. Paper publication has also been made and when department started proceeding against him even after retirement, then only he appeared. Learned Counsel further submits that from perusal of the order, it becomes crystal clear that only the excessive payment which he has received due to forgery committed by him has been demanded to be returned back otherwise proceeding has been dropped. Learned Counsel further submits that the judgment on which the petitioner is relying, i.e., Nawal Kishore Singh (supra), is not applicable in the case of the petitioner due to the reason that factual matrix of this case is different from the case on which the petitioner is relying. Counsel submits that in the earlier case, he was subjected to departmental proceeding not on the ground of forgery. 5. Upon hearing the parties and upon perusal of Patna High Court CWJC No.304 of 2025 dt.15-04-2026 5/8 the record, it transpires to this Court that the petitioner was working on the post of Statistician in the office of the District Family Welfare Bureau, Gopalganj, and from the said office he attained the age of superannuation on 31.01.2024, considering his date of birth as 28.01.1964. The basic allegation against him is that he made interpolation in his records and, instead of his actual date of birth being 28.01.1961, he altered it to 28.01.1964. When this matter came to light, the officials issued a show-cause notice to him. 6. From the order sheet as well as the pleadings, it further transpires that a suspension letter was issued to him and Prapatra ‘Ka’ was also served; however, the petitioner proceeded on leave until his retirement. A Conducting Officer was appointed in the departmental proceeding, and a show- cause notice was sent to him through registered post on 29.01.2022, but the same was returned with the remark that the petitioner was not at home and had refused to accept it. Subsequently, the Vigilance Office of the Bihar School Examination Committee, Patna, upon request, sent a report vide Letter No. 960 dated 20.02.2024 regarding his date of birth, wherein it was confirmed that the petitioner’s actual date of birth is 28.01.1961. Thereafter, the Additional Chief Medical Patna High Court CWJC No.304 of 2025 dt.15-04-2026 6/8 Officer, Gopalganj, directed that the petitioner be restrained from drawing his salary and that his retiral benefits also be withheld. Since the petitioner had already retired, the departmental proceeding was converted into one under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules vide Memo No. 1538 dated 12.07.2024 issued by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Gopalganj. A show-cause notice was thereafter issued, and subsequently, an order was passed. The impugned order, which is annexed as Annexure-P/16, reads as follows: “Jh ;ksxsUæ çlkn] rRdkyhu lka[;krk] vij eq[; fpfdRlk inkf/kdkjh dk;kZy; xksikyxat ds çkIr vekU; nLrkostksa ds vk/kkj ij cpko cukdj vius lsokeqä esa vafdr tUe frfFk esa NsM+NkM+ ,oa /kks[kk/kM+h dj djhc 03 o"kZ rd vukf/kd`r :i ls dk;Z dj osru fudklh dk vkjksi gSA budk ;g —R; ljdkjh lsod ds vkpj.k ds fo:) gSA mijksä ds vkyksd esa v|ksgLrk{kjh dk;kZy; ds Kkikad 240 fnukad 23-01-2024 }kjk bUgsa lsok dky ¼QthZ½ esa fuyafcr fd;k x;k FkkA ckj ckj fucaf/kr Mkd }kjk buds foHkkxh; tk¡p ds fy, cqykus ij t‚p inkf/kdkjh ds le{k mifLFkr ugha gq,A iqu% v|ksgLrk{kjh }kjk vius Kkikad 1538 fnukad 12-07- 2024 }kjk lsok lafgrk 43 ¼[k½ ds }kjk foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh 'kq: dh xbZA çsl foKfIr ds }kjk lwpuk nsus ij fnukad 16-08-2024 dks t‚p dfeVh ds le{k mifLFkr gq,A dfeVh }kjk vius Kkikad 128 fnukad 28-09-2024 dks fn;s x;s vius çfrosnu esa bu ij yxs lHkh vkjksiksa dh iqf"V dh xbZ gSA Patna High Court CWJC No.304 of 2025 dt.15-04-2026 7/8 mijksä of.kZr ifjfLFkfr esa buds }kjk fn;s x;s tUe frfFk ds lq/kkj ds vkosnu dh frfFk fnukad 09-03-2019 ls nks osru o`f) ij lap;kRed :i ls jksd yxkrs gq, lHkh voS/k fudklh dks C;kt lfgr ,d eqLr 15 fnuksa ds vUnj tek djus dk vkns'k nsrs gq, foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh lekIr dh tkrh gSA lsokUr ykHk Hkqxrku dk fu.kZ; ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; esa py jgs okn ds QykQy ds ckn fu.kZ; fy;k tk,xkA 7. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the allegation of forgery and interpolation in the date of birth has been alleged to be made against him due to which he has taken salary and continued in his service for three years more for which he was not entitled lawfully. This Court is of the view that when allegation of forgery and fraud in the date of birth has been alleged is 28.01.1961, this Court on perusal of the order impugned finds that it is true that no such punishment is prescribed under CCA Rules, 2005 as punishment. But from the order it transpires that only recovery of that money, which he has illegally taken either as salary or by way of promotion, has been directed to be deducted but proceeding has been dropped. 8. It is also made clear that the increment of salary with two cumulative effect has also been directed to be stopped with interest. This Court upon perusal of the order impugned, deems it fit that the excessive money has been Patna High Court CWJC No.304 of 2025 dt.15-04-2026 8/8 directed to be taken by committing fraud. So far as his increment of salary with cumulative effect is concerned, this Court hereby expunged this remark but affirmed the order for recovery of the money during the excessive period in which he has illegally earned by committing fraud by way of changing his date of birth. 9. So far as the judgment of Nawal Kishore Singh (supra) is concerned, is not applicable in the opinion of this Court due to the reason that the allegation of forgery and interpolation in the date of birth is not the subject matter in the case of Nawal Kishore Singh (supra). 10. With the aforesaid observations and modifications, this writ petition stands disposed off. Mkr./- (Dr. Anshuman, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 18.04.2026 Transmission Date