RAJESH SHANKAR,J. - (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner by way of present writ petition has prayed for quashing the entire departmental proceeding and also the order of punishment dated 04.11.1997 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition), whereby the petitioner was inflicted punishment of censure and the payment of salary during the period of suspension i.e., from 24.06.1996 to 28.10.1997 was made limited only to subsistence allowance paid to the petitioner.
(3.) The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working as Block Development Officer, Marwa in the district Samastipur (now in the State of Bihar) in the year 198485. The petitioner was served with memo of charge with six charges in the year 1992. The petitioner was also suspended on 24.06.1996, but later on, his suspension was revoked on 28.10.1997. After conclusion of the enquiry, five charges were not found proved, but with regard to charge no. 6 (i.e., the petitioner allowed the dealers to sell fertilizer in retail price of Rs.130/instead of Rs.112.50/), the Enquiry Officer found it partially proved, but recommended to the Disciplinary Authority that the benefit of doubt can be given to the petitioner. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority did not issue any second show cause notice and passed impugned order of punishment dated 04.11.1997 inflicting punishment of (1) censure and (2) the payment of salary during the period of suspension, i.e., 24.06.1996 to 28.10.1997 was made limited to subsistence allowance already paid to the petitioner, however, the said period was to be counted for the purpose of pension.;