Seema Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20176 of 2016 =========================================================== Seema Kumari Wife of Ramesh Kumar Resident of Savodaynagar Dhobighat Anite Ara, P.S.-Nawada, District-Bhojpur, Ara .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of BIhar, patna

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

3. The District Education Officer, Bhojpur, Ara

4. The District Programme Officer, (Establishment), Bhojpur, Ara

5. The District Programme Officer, (Sarva Shiksha) Bhojpur, Ara .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Vikas Kumar, AC to AG =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 07-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State.

2. The petitioner has moved the Court for the following relief:

" That this writ application is being filed for revocation of suspension of the petitioner who has been illegally suspended for the second time for not completing the work which was never allotted to her and that too in the suspension period, as well as for setting aside the order dated 06.10.2016 and further for a direction to make payments of the arrears of salary for the suspended period with interest and for any other order/orders may be passed in the facts and

Patna High Court CWJC No.20176 of 2016 dt.07-09-2017 2 / 2 circumstances of the case."

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the State submitted that he has received instructions, according to which, suspension of the petitioner has been revoked and she has also been posted and there is an order to pay the subsistence allowance for the period of suspension and all benefits, except for punishment of stoppage of one increment with non-cumulative effect dated 28.03.2017.

4. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to the concerned authorities to ensure that whatever benefit which remains to be given to the petitioner, in terms of order dated 28.03.2017 contained in Memo No. 1467 passed by the respondent no. 4, is done within one month from the date of production of a copy of this order. However, with regard to the punishment of stoppage of one increment with non-cumulative effect, it shall be open to the petitioner to move before the appropriate forum, in accordance with law, against such order.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/- AFR/NAFR U