Ram Chandra Gupta v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18780 of 2016 =========================================================== Ram Chandra Gupta, Son of Late Nathu Prasad Gupta, Resident of Village + P.O.- Mansapur, P.S.-Laukahi, District-Madhubani, presently under suspension Executive Engineer, Rural Work Department, Bihar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Additional Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vijay Bharti, AC to SC-7 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 01-09-2017 Heard Mr. Binod Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Vijay Bharti, learned Assisting Counsel to Standing Counsel No.7.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of suspension bearing Memo No.596 dated 18.2.2014 impugned at Annexure-1 to the writ petition passed in exercise of powers vested under rule 9(1)(c) of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as „the Disciplinary Rules‟). It is the argument of Mr. Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the suspension order is based on the institution of the criminal case in which cognizance is yet to be taken, although a period of more than 4 years has lapsed.

Relying upon a circular of the Department of Personnel and

Patna High Court CWJC No.18780 of 2016 dt.01-09-2017 Administrative Reforms dated 3.7.1986 more particularly paragraphs 3 and 4( ) and ( ) thereof he submits that a clear advisory has been issued that such delinquent who are facing suspension on grounds of institution of criminal case and in which cognizance has not been taken within a period of two years, the suspension order be revoked. He submits that the issue so raised in the present case was a subject matter of contest in CWJC No.5477 of 2016 (Ishwar Dayal Vs. the State of Bihar) and is squarely covered by the opinion expressed by this Court.

Mr. Bharti, learned counsel appearing for the State while submitting that the petitioner is facing vigilance case, does admit that the issue is covered under the judgment rendered in the case of Ishwar Dayal (supra).

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

The relevant extract of the circular of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms dated 3.7.1986 reads as under. "3. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .

) ... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ( ( )

Patna High Court CWJC No.18780 of 2016 dt.01-09-2017 ( ) "

It is not in dispute that the suspension order is entirely resting on the criminal case and thus the circular of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms specifically provides that in such of the cases where the suspension order is founded on the institution of criminal case and no cognizance order is passed within two years of such institution, the suspension order would be revoked, would squarely apply to the present case.

For the reasons so discussed, the order of suspension bearing Memo No.596 dated 18.2.2014 impugned at Annexure-1 is hereby quashed and set aside. The writ petitioner is reinstated on his post. The writ petition is allowed with consequential reliefs as found admissible.

(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 13.09.2017 Transmission Date NA