Director General cannot enhance disciplinary punishment beyond six months under Rule 28 of Bihar CCA Rules.

The petitioner, a Constable in the Bihar Special Armed Police (BSAP), was dismissed in 2016 following a departmental proceeding regarding allegations of an illicit relationship and breach of promise to marry

He was subsequently acquitted in the related criminal case in 2017

Upon review, the Director General of Police (DGP) set aside the dismissal and reinstated him pending a fresh inquiry

On 06.03.2019, the Commandant (Disciplinary Authority) concluded the inquiry and imposed a minor punishment of "one black mark" and forfeiture of certain pay

However, on 06.12.2021—over two years later—the DGP exercised suo motu powers to set aside the Commandant’s order and enhanced the punishment to dismissal from service

1. Whether the enhancement of punishment by the DGP was hit by the period of limitation prescribed under the relevant service rules.

2. Whether the findings of the departmental inquiry were based on "no evidence" given that the complainant did not support the charge of an illicit relationship.

Rule 28 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005. This rule empowers superior authorities to review or revise orders passed by subordinate authorities but imposes a strict limitation period of six months for such actions

Avinash Chandra vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. (2024), which reinforces that orders of enhancement passed beyond the statutory six-month window are legally unsustainable

The court rejected the petitioner's "no evidence" argument, noting that while the complainant did not prove an "illicit relationship," her testimony regarding the breach of promise to marry and the documentary evidence regarding the petitioner's unauthorized absence from duty constituted sufficient evidence for a disciplinary finding

The court found a fatal procedural error regarding the enhancement of the penalty. The Commandant’s order of a "black mark" was passed on 06.03.2019, while the DGP’s order of dismissal was passed on 06.12.2021. Since Rule 28 of the C.C.A. Rules, 2005, stipulates that such revisionary powers must be exercised within six months, the DGP's action was taken significantly out of time and without legal authority

The writ application was partly allowed; the DGP’s order dated 06.12.2021 (Annexure-19) was set aside, and the Commandant’s original order dated 06.03.2019 (Annexure-15), imposing one black mark and salary adjustments, was restored