Ram Lakhan Das v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16645 of 2017 ====================================================== Ram Lakhan Das, S/o Late Yadu Das, Resident of Village- Raghunathpur, P.O.- Silaut, P.S.- Mushahari, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Muzaffarpur.

4. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

5. The Assistant Engineer Bihar Education Project, Muzaffarpur.

6. The Additional Collector, Muzaffarpur.

7. The Sub Divisional Officer, East Muzaffarpur.

8. The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur.

9. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Muzaffarpur.

10. The District Programme Officer, Prarambhik Shiksha and Sava Sarva Siksha Abhiyan, Bihar, Education Project, Muzaffarpur.

11. The Block Education Officer, Musahari, Muzaffarpur.

12. Kundan Kumar, S/o Sundar Kumar Sinha, Resident of Village- Raghunathpur, P.O.- Silaut, P.S.- Mushahari, District- Muzaffarpur.

13. Shankar Kumar, S/o Late Sri Narayan Prasad Singh, Resident of VillageRaghunathpur, P.O.- Silaut, P.S.- Mushahari, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pradhan Murti Manohar Prasad, Advocate Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, AC to AAG15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 30-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of suspension as contained in memo no. 3961 dated 12.8.2017, Annexure-12 whereby the petitioner was put under suspension in contemplation of the departmental proceeding.

Patna High Court CWJC No.16645 of 2017 dt.30-11-2017 2/2 Counsel for the petitioner has made manifold arguments to assail the order of suspension.

From perusal of the order as contained in Annexure-12 and Prapatra Ka, as contained in Annexure-13, it appears that the Block Education Extension Officer has been made Enqiuiry Officer and charges in Prapatra Ka has already been framed and as such the respondents are required to conclude the departmental proceeding at the earliest preferably within a period of six months. In the event the departmental proceeding is not concluded within the aforesaid period of six months, the order of suspension as well as the departmental proceeding shall come to an end. It goes without saying that the petitioner will extend full cooperation in the matter of early conclusion of the departmental proceeding.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 1.12.2017 Transmission Date