Order By Court.-Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner herein has challenged the order of his dismissal from service dated 10th of August, 1999 (Annexure-8) primarily on two grounds. The first ground is that for allegation of having produced a false caste certificate of Khairwar, a Scheduled Tribes Category, he was proceeded against in a departmental inquiry vide Annexure-1 dated 20th of August, 1981 and was punished vide order dated 25th November, 1983 (Annexure-2) whereunder he was reduced by one grade to the post of Assistant Store-keeper. 3. It is submitted that for the same set of charges of having produced the false certificate, he has once again been proceeded against in a departmental inquiry initiated on 3rd of February, 1997, as such, he has been punished twice for the same charges. The second ground for assailing the same is that the petitioner has produced a certificate of Khairwar, which is a Scheduled Tribes Category Caste notified in the State of Bihar by Presidential Notification dated 29th of October, 1956 and therefore, he has not falsely represented to obtain any service benefit under the respondents which justify the punishment against him. Additionally, the petitioner has also raised a ground that the departmental proceeding has been concluded ex parte without affording him adequate opportunity of hearing and to defend himself. 4. The petitioner was appointed as Storehand in the year 1971 and thereafter, was promoted as Storeman in 1972 and again promoted as Assistant Store-keeper in 1977 and in the year 1980, he was promoted as Store-keeper. Thereafter, proceedings were initiated against him vide Annexure-1 dated 20th of August, 1981 on the grounds that he had obtained a caste certificate dated 30th September, 1980 from the City Magistrate showing his caste as Khairwar, a Scheduled Tribe and on the basis of that, got his promotion from Assistant Store-keeper to Store-keeper vide office order dated 30th September, 1980 against the vacancy reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidate. The Statement of allegations which were enclosed with the charge-sheet allege that he had joined HSCL on 16th February, 1971 as Storehand. He got all his promotion up to Assistant Store-keeper as a general candidate and not against the scheduled tribe candidate. In his personal data form submitted under his signature on 25th January, 1974, he did not disclose that he is a member of scheduled tribes or scheduled castes candidate. He got all his promotion up to Assistant Store-keeper as a general candidate and not against the scheduled tribe candidate. In his personal data form submitted under his signature on 25th January, 1974, he did not disclose that he is a member of scheduled tribes or scheduled castes candidate. The Block Development Officer, Barhara, Bhojpur after official inquiry, confirmed that the petitioner is Kahar (Rawani), which comes under the backward class category and not scheduled tribes category. However, he had furnished a false certificate on 30th September, 1980 and got the promotion on the basis of that. On the charges having been established, he was punished with reduction to the grade of Assistant Store-keeper vide order dated 25th of November, 1983. The second proceeding under which the impugned order of dismissal has been passed, was initiated on 3rd of February, 1997. The imputation of charges allege that the petitioner was Kahar which is a backward class. In spite of that, he obtained the scheduled tribes certificate of Khairwar caste from the Block Development Officer, Barhara-and Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Arrah in 1993 in a wrongful manner and submitted it to the authorities claiming promotion under reserved quota. Thereafter, detail verification were carried out which confirmed that he is a Kahar by caste and does not belong to the scheduled tribes category. 5. The petitioner had thereafter approached the Ranchi Bench of Patna High Court in CWJC No. 1681/97(R) against the initiation of the departmental inquiry in the year 1997 as alleged on the same set of charges. However, the said writ petition was dismissed as without any merit. Inquiry was conducted against the petitioner vide Annexure-5. Perusal of the inquiry report discloses that the petitioner had remained absent on a number of dates in the 7th, 8th & 9th sittings. Thereafter, in 1he 10th sitting, his co-worker attended the inquiry proceeding, but left it without signing the daily proceedings which has been commented as usual practice by the inquiry officer. Thereafter, the inquiry was conducted ex-parte by recording that the delinquent employee and co-worker has not been participating in the inquiry and are not serious to defend their cases. Thereafter, in 1he 10th sitting, his co-worker attended the inquiry proceeding, but left it without signing the daily proceedings which has been commented as usual practice by the inquiry officer. Thereafter, the inquiry was conducted ex-parte by recording that the delinquent employee and co-worker has not been participating in the inquiry and are not serious to defend their cases. On the basis of the case made out by the presenting officer, and on the basis of the report which was furnished by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Arrah contained at Annexure-7, the inquiry officer came to a conclusion that the petitioner belongs to a Kahar caste which falls in the category of backward class and not Khairwar, a scheduled tribes category. Annexure-7 dated 4th of October, 1996 which is a report of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Arrah disclose that in the year 1981, the then, Block Development Officer had issued a caste certificate of Kahar in favour of the petitioner. However, again on 26th November, 1993, caste certificate of Khairwar, a scheduled tribe category, was issued on the pressure of local politician. During the course of inquiry, related papers of the land and Khatiyan were asked to be produced which on verification was found that the Kewala also refers their caste as Kahar. It was also taken into account that the people residing in the said village to which the petitioner belongs are of Kahar caste, but they often claim themselves to be Khairwar in order to get the benefit of scheduled tribes, category. Thereafter, the impugned order of dismissal has been passed on 10th of August, 1999 finding that the petitioner has produced false information and certificate regarding his caste and thereby committed grave misconduct which entails major penalty of dismissal. 6. From the facts which have been narrated herein above and borne on the pleadings and after hearing the parties, the grounds on which the impugned order is assailed by the petitioner that the second punishment order is also passed on the same set of charges, stand on the face of it, demolished. On the first account, he had produced a caste certificate of Khairwar in 1980 and got promotion to the post of Store-keeper which was the basis for initiation of first departmental inquiry and the charge-sheet which leads to his demotion to the post of Assistant Store-keeper. On the first account, he had produced a caste certificate of Khairwar in 1980 and got promotion to the post of Store-keeper which was the basis for initiation of first departmental inquiry and the charge-sheet which leads to his demotion to the post of Assistant Store-keeper. The petitioner did not improve his conduct and again tried to procure the benefits in service by producing another caste certificate of Khaiwar in 1993 which was verified by the respondents. On receipt of the report of Sub-Divisional Officer after local inquiry and verification of the documents produced by the petitioner and his family members, it led to initiation of second departmental inquiry for having produced false certificate to obtain service benefits meant for reserved category candidates: From the aforesaid facts, it is therefore clear that the second set of inquiry was not based on the same set of charges. The second ground raised by the petitioner also does not stand on the facts as well as in law as it is clear that the petitioner was a member of a Kahar Caste which is a backward class and had also produced a certificate to that effect and had also disclosed the same in his service records till 1980 since his appointment in the year 1971. However, much later, he resorted to obtain the certificate of Khairwar caste twice in the year 1980 and 1993 which were the basis for initiation of departmental proceedings separately and foe separate charges. Therefore, the Presidential Notification of 1956 showing Khairwar as Scheduled Tribes, does not entail any benefit to the petitioner as he does not belong to the said caste. The third ground of lack of adequate opportunity also is falsified on mere perusal of the inquiry report where after 10th sitting, the inquiry officer had to proceed ex-parte because of the conduct of the petitioner for not cooperating and participating in the inquiry proceeding. 7. In that view of the matter, none of the grounds raised by the petitioner to assail the impugned order, are tenable in law or on facts and the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity to warrant interference in the writ jurisdiction by this court. The writ petition is dismissed.