Umesh Prasad Singh vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8154 of 2023
CNR No. BRHC010442512023
======================================================
Umesh Prasad Singh Son of late Budhdeo Prasad Singh Resident of Gosai
Tola, P.S-Patliputra, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Water Resources
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Engineer-In-Chief -Cum- Additional Secretary-Cum- Special Secretary,
Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Chief Engineer, Central Design, Research and Quality Control, Water
Resources Department, Anisabad, Patna.
5. The Director-Cum-Conducting Officer, Dam Safety Cell, Water Resources
Department, Water Resources Building, Anisabad,Patna.
6. The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Dam and Gate
Design Division-1, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Mishra, Senior Advocate
Mrs. Manini Jaiswal, Advocate
Mr. Shreyas Anand, Advocate
Mr. Shubham Kr. Upadhyay, Advocate
Ms. Megha Rani, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Deepak Sahay Jamuan, AC to AAG-4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-10-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
2/15
“(i) For issuing writ of
certiorari and thereby quashing / Setting
aside of Order dated 28.02.2023 bearing
Memo No.17-2018 issued by Chief Engineer,
Central Design, Research and Quality
Control, Water Resources Department,
Anisabad, Patna whereby and whereunder
the Petitioner who was under suspension
and was earlier posted as Draftsman in Dam
and Gate Design Division-1, Anishabad, has
been dismissed from the service from
retrospective date i.e. 26.10.2019.
(ii) For issuing writ of
certiorari and thereby quashing / Setting
aside of inquiry report dated 12.09.2009
which has been prepared by the inquiry
officer without even calling for statement
/submissions from presenting officer and
mere absence of petitioner has inferred to be
the proof of misconducts alleged in memo of
charge dated 12.07.2009.
(iii) For issuing any appropriate
writ including the writ of mandamus and
directing thereby the respondents to give
petitioner continuity of service for the period
he has been out of the service owing to the
impugned order of dismissal dated
28.02.2023
(iv) For issuing any appropriate
writ including the writ of mandamus

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
3/15
directing thereby the Respondents to grant
the salary of the petitioner for the period of
26.10.2019 until the date of issuance of
order dated 28.02.2023 for which he was
under suspension for which he was not even
granted subsistence allowance.
(v) For issuing any appropriate
writ including the writ of mandamus and
directing thereby the petitioner be granted
all consequential benefit (including payment
of arrears of salary, annual increment and
other service emoluments admissible to the
petitioner) arising out of setting aside of
impugned order of dismissal dated
28.02.2023
(vi) For issuing appropriate
order(s)/direction(s) including the writ of
mandamus directing thereby to the
respondents that the petitioner may be
granted all post retiral benefits including
gratuity, GPF, Group Insurance, Earn Leave
and Pension from the date of
superannuation.
(vii) The Hon'ble Court may
pass any other order/orders which it may
deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the
case and within the ends of equity, justice
and good conscience.
(viii) For issuing writ of
certiorari and thereby quashing the order

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
4/15
dated 30.06.2023 passed by Additional chief
Secretary, Water Resources Department
Government of Bihar (Respondent No.2)
Whereby and Whereunder the appeal of the
petitioner has been dismissed/rejected and
the order of dismissal (dated 28.02.2023) of
the petitioner, issued by Chief Engineer,
Central Design, Research and Quality
Control, Water Resources Department,
Anisabad, Patna (Respondent No.4) has ben
affirmed.
(ix) For granting, all
consequential relief (s) to the petitioner
which the petitioner is entitled as
consequence of setting aside of order dated
30.06.2023.
(x) For passing any other order
as this court deems fit in the facts and
circumstances of this case.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner was posted as a Draftsman in the Dam and Gate
Design Division-1, Anisabad, by the District Planning Officer,
Patna-cum-Secretary, District Urban Development Agency,
Patna, vide Memo No. 353 dated 27.07.2013. The petitioner was
given the additional charge of Junior Engineer for the schemes
of the Urban Development and Housing Department, and he
was posted under the Executive Engineer, Urban Engineering

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
5/15
Cell of the District Urban Development Agency, Patna (DUDA-
2).
4. Counsel further submits that the petitioner was
given the additional charge by virtue of Letter No. 4219 dated
24.12.2014. Counsel further submits that, in the year 2019,
Prapatra-Ka, vide letter dated 12.07.2019 (Annexure-P/4), was
issued, whereby the petitioner was directed to file his defence
before the Inquiry Officer. A Presenting Officer was also
appointed.
5. Counsel further submits that the petitioner could
not file his reply, and the Inquiry Officer submitted his report
dated 12.09.2019. The Inquiry Officer found him guilty of the
charges, whereupon a second show-cause notice was issued on
14.09.2019. The petitioner filed his reply on 29.09.2019, and he
was punished vide order dated 26.10.2019, contained in Memo
No. 1201.
6. Counsel further submits that the said order was
challenged before this Hon’ble Court in CWJC No. 311 of 2020
on the ground that the petitioner was never given an opportunity,
by way of a second show-cause notice, to rebut the findings
recorded in the inquiry report dated 12.09.2019. The final order
contained in Memo No. 1201 dated 26.10.2019 was set aside by

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
6/15
this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 02.01.2023, as it had been
passed in gross violation of Rule 18(4) of the Bihar Government
Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005
(hereinafter referred to as ‘Bihar CCA Rules, 2005’).
7. Counsel further submits that the matter was
remanded to the official respondents, with liberty to pass a fresh
order after considering the petitioner’s reply to the second show-
cause notice, within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of the order.
8. Counsel further submits that, this time, the
respondents passed a final order dated 28.02.2023, contained in
Memo No. 256, upholding the order of dismissal from service of
the petitioner. Counsel further submits that the petitioner
challenged the said order in the present writ petition. However,
during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner’s appeal
against the original order was also dismissed vide order dated
30.06.2023, whereby a separate consequential order was passed
by the respondent authorities.
9. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is well
aware that the scope of judicial review is very limited and only
the issues relating to violation of the principles of natural
justice, procedural irregularities, and exorbitant punishment are

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
7/15
to be examined.
10. Counsel further submits that Annexure-4 is the
charge memo and, from a perusal of the charge memo, it
becomes crystal clear that a subsequent direction was issued by
the disciplinary authority to the petitioner to submit his defence
directly before the Inquiry Officer, and no opportunity was
granted to file a written statement (W.S.).
11. Counsel further submits that the non-provision
of an opportunity to submit a W.S. before the disciplinary
authority amounts to a gross violation of Rules 17(4) and 17(5)
of the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005. Counsel further submits that the
petitioner is well aware that, by denying him the opportunity to
file a W.S. and directing him to submit his defence directly
before the Inquiry Officer, the respondents acted in gross
violation of the established procedural law, thereby violating the
petitioner’s rights and depriving him of one opportunity to
defend himself.
12. Counsel further submits that the charge memo
is also defective, as it is not in accordance with the Bihar
Framing of Articles of Charge against Government Servants
Regulations, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as Regulations of
2017). Therefore, on these two grounds, counsel submits that

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
8/15
the entire proceeding was conducted on the basis of a defective
charge memo and in disregard of the established law. Hence,
both orders are liable to be set aside, and the petitioner is
entitled to all consequential reliefs arising from the setting aside
of the order dated 30.06.2023.
13. Counsel relies on one judgment, namely, Manoj
Kumar v. The State of Bihar & Ors. , dated 27.07.2026, passed in
CWJC No. 13942 of 2022, and submits that this issue has
already been decided by this Court, holding that, in the event of
a violation of Rules 17(3), 17(4), 17(5) and 17(6) such
proceedings are liable to be declared bad in law.
14. Learned counsel for the State, on the other
hand, submits that the petitioner had earlier approached this
Court in CWJC No. 311 of 2020, wherein, vide order dated
02.01.2023, the matter was remanded with a direction to the
official respondents to pass a fresh order after considering the
petitioner’s reply to the second show-cause notice within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the
order.
15. Counsel further submits that, once the matter
had been remanded by this Court for the limited purpose of
considering the petitioner’s reply to the second show-cause

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
9/15
notice, it necessarily follows that the proceedings up to the stage
of the second show-cause notice had been correctly dealt with
by the disciplinary authority. Therefore, he submits that the only
issue left open for the petitioner to raise is whether the second
show-cause reply was considered or not. The petitioner cannot
go beyond this issue and raise alleged irregularities in the
inquiry proceedings, which ought to have been raised earlier but
were not raised. According to him, the doctrine of res judicata
shall apply.
16. Learned counsel for the State concludes his
arguments by submitting that, before entering into the
substantive issues raised by the petitioner in the present writ
petition, it is necessary to examine the pleadings in the earlier
writ petition. Only thereafter can this Court determine whether
the points raised by the petitioner may be taken into
consideration or not.
17. Counsel categorically submits that the scope of
judicial review is very limited and the Court exercising judicial
review may not enter into the factual matrix of the case, save
and except in cases involving procedural irregularities, violation
of the principles of natural justice, and exorbitant punishment.
18. With a view to deciding this issue, it is

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
10/15
necessary to quote and reiterate the provisions laid down under
Rules 17(3), 17(4), 17(5), and 17(6) of the Bihar CCA Rules,
2005 which is as follows:
17(3) Where it is proposed to hold
an inquiry against a government servant
under this Rule, the disciplinary authority
shall draw up or cause to be drawn up-
(i) the substance of the
imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour
as a definite and distinct article of charge;
(ii) a statement of the imputations
of misconduct or misbehaviour in support of
each article of charge, which shall contain-
(a) a statement of all relevant facts
including any admission or confession made
by the Government Servant;
(b) a list of such document by
which, and a list of such witnesses by whom,
the articles of charge are proposed to be
sustained.
17(4) The disciplinary authority
shall deliver or cause to be delivered to the
Government Servant a copy of the articles of
charge, such statement of the imputations of
misconduct or misbehaviour and a list of
documents and witnesses by which each
article of charge is proposed to be sustained
and shall require the Government Servant to
submit, within such time as may be specified,
a written statement of his defence and to
state whether he desires to be heard in
person.
17(5) (a) On receipt of the written
statement of defence, the disciplinary
authority may himself inquire into such of
the articles of charge which are not

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
11/15
admitted, or, if it thinks necessary to appoint,
under sub-rule (2) of this Rule, an inquiry
authority for the purpose he may do so and
where all the articles of charges have been
admitted by the Government Servant in his
written statement of defence, the disciplinary
authority shall record his findings on each
charge after taking such evidence as it may
think fit and shall take action in the manner
laid down in Rule 18.
(b) If no written statement of
defence is submitted by the Government
Servant, the disciplinary authority may itself
inquire into the articles of charge or may, if
it thinks necessary to appoint, under sub-
rule (2) of this Rule an inquiry authority for
the purpose, it may do so.
(c) Where the disciplinary
authority itself inquires into any article of
charge or appoints an inquiring authority
for holding an inquiry about such charge, it
may, by an order, appoint a government
servant or a legal practitioner to be known
as the "Presenting officer' to present on his
behalf the case in support of the articles of
charge.
17(6) . The disciplinary authority
shall, where it is not the inquiring authority,
forward the following records to the
inquiring authority-
(i) a copy of the articles of charge
and the statement of the imputations of
misconduct or misbehaviour;
(ii) a copy of the written statement
of defence, if any, submitted by the
government servant:
(iii) a copy of the statement of
witnesses, if any, specified in sub-rule (3) of
this Rule.

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
12/15
(iv) evidence proving the delivery
of the documents specified to in sub- Rule
(3) to the Government Servant; and
(v) a copy of the order appointing
the “Presenting officer".
19. With a view to examining the issue, it would
also be pertinent to reproduce the relevant provisions of the
Regulations of 2017, which read as follows:
“2. Framing of articles of
charge.- The disciplinary authority shall
record or cause to be recorded the definite
and distinct articles of charges under sub-
rule (3) of Rule 17 of the Bihar Government
Servants (Classification, Control and
Appeal) Rules, 2005 (as amended from time
to time).
3. Drafting of article of
charges.-(1)- Article of charges shall be in
four parts.
(2) In first part, the personal
informations of the concerned Government
servant shall be recorded.
(3) Second part shall contain
the substance of the imputations of
misconduct or misbehavior as a definite and
distinct articles of charge.
(4) Third part shall contain a
statement of the imputations of misconduct
or misbehavior in support of each article of

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
13/15
charge which shall contain a statement of all
relevant facts including any admission or
confession made by the government servant.
(5) Fourth part shall contain a
list of such document by which, and a list of
such witnesses by whom, the articles of
charge are proposed to be sustained.
(6) An imaginary model articles
of charge is enclosed as Appendix -1 for
example.”
20. From a perusal of the charge memo, it
transpires to this Court that a specific direction was given to the
delinquent employee to submit his defence before the Inquiry
Officer. The State has no defence to this specific direction, save
and except that the pleadings of the earlier writ petition have to
be examined.
21. It further transpires to this Court that the date of
framing of the charge was 12.07.2019, whereas the date of
publication of the Regulations of 2017 in the Bihar Gazette was
19.12.2017.
22. This Court is of the firm view, upon perusal of
the charge memo, that the charge memo dated 12.07.2019,
which was issued to the petitioner-delinquent, was not issued in
accordance with the Regulations of 2017. Rather, it was issued

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
14/15
in gross violation of the Regulations of 2017, as well as in
violation of Rule 17(3), under which the Government servant
ought to have been required by the disciplinary authority itself
to submit a W.S.
23. The contention of the State is that the petitioner
is not entitled to raise the plea concerning the charge memo
because he had earlier approached this Court in CWJC No. 311
of 2020, wherein the matter was remanded only for the purpose
of passing an order after considering the second show-cause
reply.
24. However, this Court is of the firm view that,
after an order dated 28.02.2023, which is impugned herein, has
been passed, the Court, while examining the legality or illegality
of a decision rendered by the lower authorities, Court, or
Tribunal, must examine the challenge in its totality and not in a
partial manner.
25. For this reason, this Court does not agree with
the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents
and finds that the charge memo itself is defective and is in
violation of the Regulations of 2017, as well as Rules 17(4) and
17(5) of the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005. Hence, the original order
passed by the disciplinary authority, contained in Memo No.

Patna High Court CWJC No.8154 of 2023 dt.29-10-2026
15/15
256, dated-28.02.2023 passed by the Chief Engineer, Central
Design, Research and Quality Control, Water Resources
Department, Anisabad, Patna (Annexure-1) and the appellate
order dated 30.06.2023 passed by the Additional Chief
Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar
(Annexure-P/12) are hereby set aside.
26. The respondent authorities are hereby directed
to ensure payment to the petitioner of all his outstanding dues,
as well as his retiral benefits, if he has retired, within three
months from the date of production of a copy of this order.
27. With the above observations and directions, the
present writ petition stands allowed.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 06.11.2026
Transmission Date NA