2026:JHHC:1383 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.W.J.C No.5171 of 2000 ------- Sri Nandan Prasad Sah S/o late Ayodhaya Prasad Sah R/o Mohalla Champa Nagar, T.B.Road, P.S. Nath Nagar, Dist. Bhagalpur. ...… Petitioner Versus 1 The Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna through its Managing Director. 2. The Managing Director Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. .….Respondents ------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. K.P.Yadav, Adv. ------- 04/Dated:13.01.2026 1. The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for the following relief:- (i) For quashing the order dated 30.10.1999 passed by the Managing Director of the Board by which the petitioner has been punished two increments has been withheld with a further direction that the petitioner will not receive any salary of his suspension period except subsistence allowance received by the petitioner. (ii) For quashing the order of suspension dated 16.2.1999 issued under the signature of the Managing Director of the Board which has been passed without application of mind which is nothing but a colourable exercise of power. 2. After going through the enquiry report especially in the concluding portion which is at 2026:JHHC:1383 2 Annexure-4 to the writ application, it appears that the Inquiry officer has exonerated the petitioner from entire charges. For brevity, relevant portion of the inquiry report is extracted here under. “इस, पकार सम्पूर्ण करवाई में भी साह के द्वारा दिये गये स्पष्टीकरर् तथ्य एव साቌኚय से यह स्पष्र होता है कक ्ቦी साह पर लगाये गये ये तोनों आरोप जाचोपरान्त ्ቚमाणर्त नहीीं है। साथ हो आरोप ्ቚथम दृष्टया ्ቚमाणर्त नही होता है। अतः ्ቦी ्ቦीनन्िन ्ቚसाि साह, सहायक अभभयन्ता ननलम्म्ित सम््ቚनत सहायक ननिेशक कायाणलय, िरभींगा में सींलग्न के स्पष्टीकरर् को स्वोकार करते हुए ्ቦी साह पर लगाये गये आरोप हो मुक्त करने की अनुशींसा को जाती है।” 3. By going through this specific statement of the Inquiry officer, it is clear that the charges were not proved. However, after going through the impugned order dated 30-10-1999, no reason has been assigned in the impugned order while imposing punishment. Interestingly, the disciplinary authority has stated that he has considered enquiry report, however, ignoring the same, he has imposed punishment. For brevity, the entire impugned order is quoted here-in-below:- पटना, दिनाींक 30/10/1999 पशण्ቖीय कायालय आिेश सींख्या-10 दिनाींक 16-2-99 िारा 'ननलम्म्ित ्ቦी ्ቦीनन्िन ्ቚसाि साह, सहायक अभभयींता सह-्ቚभारी कायणपालक अभभयींता, भागलपुर सम््ቚनत सहायक ननिेशक, िरभींगा का कायाणलय के ववरुि पााँ्ቖीय ्ሺापाींक 148/नन०, दिनाींक 9-3/99 द्वारा चलायी गयी ववभागीय कायणवाही के सींचालन पिाधिकारी हारा समवपणत जाच ्ቚनतवेिन पर िेविार के ' अन्तगणत सारठ रोड से भलींक पथ पर पुभलया का ननमाणर् नहीीं करने का आरोप ्ቚमाणर्त पाया गया है । उल्लेणित तथ्यों के आलोक में सम्यकू वविारोपरान्त ्ቦी साह को ननम्नभलणित सजा के साथा ननलम्िन ते मुक्त करते हुए ववभागीय कायणवाही समाप्त की जाती है :- 2026:JHHC:1383 3 (1) ्ቦी साह की िो वावषणक वेतन वृम्दिया असींचयात्मक ्ቚभाव से रोकी जाती है। (2) ्ቦी साह को ननलम्िन अवधि में जीवन ननवाणह भ्ቈा के अनतररक्त अन्य कोई राभश िेय नहीीं होगी । 4. From conjoint reading of the relevant portion of enquiry report and the impugned order, this Court is having no hesitation in holding that the impugned order is bad in law on two counts. Firstly, the same is non-reasoned order/non- speaking order. Secondly, though in the order of punishment it has been mentioned that the disciplinary authority has considered enquiry report, but in essence, he has not considered the enquiry report, inasmuch as, the Inquiry officer has categorically stated that none of the charges has been proved. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 30.10.1999, is hereby, quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the Respondents are directed to calculate the monetary benefits, which was not given to the Petitioner pursuant to the impugned order, which has already been quashed herein above. The entire exercise shall be made within a period of 12 weeks. 6. As a result, the instant writ application stands allowed. Pending, I.As., if any, is also closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) January 13, 2026 Fahim/- Uploaded on 28/01/2026