JUDGMENT : Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- "That this is an application for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the communication issued under the hand of Registrar General of the Hon'ble High Court contained under memo no. 6103 dated 4th May, 2011 whereby and where under the petitioner has been intimated that the Hon'ble High Court after having considered the service appeal of the petitioner, dismissed Night Guard, has been pleased to pass order/ resolved to dismiss the said departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order no. 3/10 dated 7.5.2010 passed by the District & Sessions Judge Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with the departmental proceeding conducted against the petitioner thereby inflicting the punishment dismissing the petitioner from service inter alia the following reliefs:- (i) The order of the Hon'ble High Court passed in its administrative side resolving to dismiss the departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner so in a cryptic manner without assigning any reason be declared as illegal, void and against the mandate of law and accordingly be set aside; (ii) The respondents concerned be directed to re-instate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits; (iii) Respondents' action of inflicting the major punishment dismissing the petitioner from service be deprecated as being not reciprocal to the charges; (iv) Any other relief/reliefs be granted to the petitioner as he is found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case." 3. On 22.09.2022, following order was passed:- "Heard the matter for sometime. Learned counsel for respondents are hereby directed to produce copy of the standing committee proceedings in rejection of the petitioner’s appeal and further such a proceeding in the form of order issued in the name of Registrar General is communicated to the petitioner or not? These information be made available on the next date of hearing. Re-list this matter on 20.10.2022." 4. Brief facts are that the petitioner was working as Night Guard in the District Court, Vaishali on 23.02.2009. There was a fire accident in the office of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court II and III, Vaishali at Hajipur due to which extensive damage has caused to the judicial records. Re-list this matter on 20.10.2022." 4. Brief facts are that the petitioner was working as Night Guard in the District Court, Vaishali on 23.02.2009. There was a fire accident in the office of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court II and III, Vaishali at Hajipur due to which extensive damage has caused to the judicial records. Taking note of the aforesaid alleged accident petitioner and his colleague Ram Ishwar Mahto were placed under suspension. Thereafter, departmental enquiry was initiated while framing nine charges in common proceedings. The petitioner is stated to have demanded certain documents. In this regard, presenting officer was directed to furnish the documents. Documents were not supplied to the petitioner. Petitioner had submitted his written submission wherein pleaded his innocence that he was not at Vaishali at the time of alleged accident. He was away from Vaishali and had gone to Patna since his father was ailing. On 31st March, 2010 enquiry officer submitted his report in which it is held that charges levelled against the petitioner and another were proved. Thereafter, copy of the enquiry report and show cause was issued to the petitioner on 16.04.2010 seeking explanation on the enquiring officer's report. On 29.04.2010 petitioner reiterated his stand that he was innocent. Based on these material information, disciplinary authority proceeded to impose penalty of dismissal from service on 07.05.2010. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the dismissal order petitioner had preferred appeal before the appellate authority on 07.06.2010 and it was dismissed while passing resolution by the Standing Committee. Thereafter, decision was communicated through the Registrar General, Patna High Court, Patna. Hence the present writ petition. 5. Today, learned counsel for respondent furnished copy of the resolution dated 26.04.2011, in which Agenda No. 8 and its resolution reads as under:- Agenda Resolution 8 To consider the matter relating to Memorandum of Appeal filed by Sri Md. Parvez Alam, a dismissed Nigh Guard of Civil Courts, Hajipur (IV-127-2010) It is resolved to dismiss the appeal filed by Sri Md. Parvez Alam, a dismissed Night Guard of Civil Courts, Hajipur. 6. Thereafter, a formal detailed and specific order should have been passed and communicated. Neither the resolution dated 26.04.2011 nor the order dated 04.05.2011 issued by the Registrar General is speaking order on petitioner's appeal. Parvez Alam, a dismissed Night Guard of Civil Courts, Hajipur. 6. Thereafter, a formal detailed and specific order should have been passed and communicated. Neither the resolution dated 26.04.2011 nor the order dated 04.05.2011 issued by the Registrar General is speaking order on petitioner's appeal. In other words, gist/contents of Memorandum of appeal is not forthcoming and its analysis in dismissing the appeal of the petitioner. Therefore, both resolution and order are not speaking one. Therefore, petitioner has made out a case. Hence, impugned order dated 04.05.2011 stands set aside. Matter is remanded to the respondent to re-visit the memorandum of appeal of the petitioner and proceed in accordance with relevant provision of law like, consideration of appeal under Rule 27 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to “Rules, 2005”) read with Rule 19 of the Bihar Civil Court Staff (Class III and Class IV) Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred to Rules, 2009"). Disciplinary action would be taken against Class III and Class IV Employees under Rules, 2009, which reads as under:- "19. Disciplinary Action. -The District Judge shall be the disciplinary authority of Class III and IV employees. The District Judge may suspend, initiate any disciplinary proceeding, issue a charge sheet, enquire into the charge against the delinquent employees himself or cause the same to be done by any other Judicial Officer and impose any of the penalties specified in Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005." In other words, Class III and Class IV employees of Bihar Civil Court are governed by Rules, 2005 insofar as initiation of disciplinary proceedings and its conclusion. No doubt Rule 20 of Rules, 2009 provides for appeal against penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority, however, Rule 27 of Rules, 2005 is relevant for the purpose as to how to consider the memorandum of appeal filed by an aggrieved person/ Class III and Class IV employees of Bihar Civil Court. Therefore, it is necessary to reproduce Rule 20 of Rules, 2009 and Rule 27 of Rules, 2005, which read as under:- Rule 20 of Rules, 2009 "20. Appeal. Therefore, it is necessary to reproduce Rule 20 of Rules, 2009 and Rule 27 of Rules, 2005, which read as under:- Rule 20 of Rules, 2009 "20. Appeal. -(1) Any employee aggrieved by imposition of any minor/major punishment upon him by the disciplinary authority may prefer an appeal to the High Court within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the said order and/or from the date of communication of the said order upon the concerned employee. (2) Such memorandum of appeal shall be forwarded by the District Judge concerned to the Registrar of the High Court together with his comments thereon, if any, within two weeks from the date of receipt of such memorandum of appeal. (3) The Standing Committee of the High Court shall, dispose of such appeal as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the memorandum of appeal, if the same has been preferred against an order imposing a major penalty and by the Judge Administrative Department No. 1 in case of minor penalty. (4) All procedures for holding Departmental proceeding, imposition of penalty, disposal of appeal etc, shall be governed by such statutory Rules as are applicable for the employees concerned." (underline supplied) Rule 27 of Rules, 2005 reads as under:- "27. Consideration of appeal. -(1) In the case of an appeal against an order of suspension, the appellate authority shall consider whether in view of the provisions of Rule 9 and having regard to the circumstances of the case, the order of suspension is justified or not and confirm or revoke or modify the order accordingly. Consideration of appeal. -(1) In the case of an appeal against an order of suspension, the appellate authority shall consider whether in view of the provisions of Rule 9 and having regard to the circumstances of the case, the order of suspension is justified or not and confirm or revoke or modify the order accordingly. (2) In the case of an appeal against an order imposing any of the penalties specified in Rule 14, the appellate authority shall consider - (a) whether the procedure laid down in these Rules has been complied within and if not, whether such non-compliance has resulted in the violation of any provisions of the Constitution of India or in the failure of justice; (b) whether the findings of the disciplinary authority are warranted by the evidence on the record; and (c) whether the penalty imposed is adequate, inadequate or severe; and pass orders- (i) confirming, enhancing, reducing, or setting aside the penalty; or (ii) remitting the case to the authority which imposed the penalty or to any other authority with such direction as it may deem fit in the circumstances of the case: Provided that- (i) the Commission shall be consulted in all cases where such consultation is necessary; (ii) if the enhanced penalty which the appellate authority proposes to impose is one of the penalties specified in clauses (i) to (v) of Rule 14 and an inquiry under Rule 17 has not already been held in the case, the appellate authority shall, subject to the provisions of Rule 19, himself hold such inquiry or direct that such inquiry be held in accordance with the provisions of Rule 18 and thereafter on a consideration of the proceedings of such inquiry and after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity, as far as may be in accordance with the provisions of clause (ii) of Rule, 18 of making a representation against the penalty proposed on the basis of the evidence adduced during such inquiry, make such orders as it may deem fit; (iii) if the enhanced penalty which the appellate authority proposed to impose is one of the penalties specified in clauses (i) to (v) of Rule 14 and an inquiry under Rule 17 has already been held in the case, the appellate authority shall, make such orders as it may deem fit, after the appellant has been given a reasonable opportunity of making a representation against the proposed penalty; and (iv) no order imposing an enhanced penalty shall be made in any other case unless the appellant has been given a reasonable opportunity, as far as may be, of making a representation against such enhanced penalty. (3) The appellate authority shall consider all the circumstances of the case and make such orders as it may deem just and equitable." 7. The concerned respondent-appellate authority is hereby directed to take note of the aforementioned provision of law and proceed to pass a fresh order on the memorandum of appeal of the petitioner and communicate the decision to the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.