Limitation for service discharge challenge runs from communication of the final revisional order after departmental remedies are exhausted.

Where a disciplinary discharge is carried through the prescribed appeal and revision hierarchy, limitation for a civil challenge runs from the date of communication of the final revisional order, not from the original discharge order. The appellant's service discharge was pursued under Rule 12 of the Bihar and Orissa Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1935, and the State Government's revisional order was communicated only on 19-12-1965. On that basis, the suit filed on 7-8-1968 was within limitation, and the High Court erred in dismissing the challenge as time-barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suit challenging the discharge from service was barred by limitation, and whether limitation had to be computed from the original discharge order or from the date on which the State Government's revisional order was communicated.

Analysis: The appellant's service discharge was carried in appeal and revision under Rule 12 of the Bihar and Orissa Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1935. The revisional proceedings before the State Government constituted the final stage of the departmental remedy, and the final order was communicated only on 19-12-1965. In such a situation, the period of limitation for instituting the suit had to be counted from the date of communication of the final revisional order, not from the date of the original discharge order.

Conclusion: The suit filed on 7-8-1968 was within limitation, and the High Court erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground of limitation.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a disciplinary order is carried through the prescribed appeal and revision hierarchy, limitation for a civil challenge runs from the date of communication of the final revisional order.

---