Dinkar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13966 of 2021 ====================================================== Dinkar Prasad Son of Sri Kishore Sah Resident of Village- Gorigama, P.S.- Runi Saidpur, District- Sitamarhi, at present Tax Daroga cum Head Clerk (Under Suspension), Nagar Panchayat, Dumra, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through the Secretary, Urban Development Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

Officer on Special Duty Urban Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 3.

District Magistrate Sitamarhi.

4.

Executive Officer Nagar Panchayat Dumra, District- Sitamarhi. 5.

Additional Collector, Sitamarhi cum Departmental Proceeding Officer Sitamarhi.

6.

Mrityunjay Kumar Sanjay Son of Sri Surendra Narayan Prasad Ex-Ward Commissioner, resident of Mahavir Chowk, Ward No. 7, Durma, Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Uma Kant Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Rakesh Ambastha, AC to AAG-07 For the Nagar Nigam :

Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate Mr. Subodh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 22-12-2021 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

"(i) An appropriate writ/order/direction, quashing the order of suspension, contained in Memo No. 458 dated 14.12.2020, holding the same as illegal and void, be issued;

(ii) An appropriate writ/order/direction, commanding the respondents, especially Respondent no. 4 to allow the petitioner to perform his duty as usual within a time frame, be issued;

Patna High Court CWJC No.13966 of 2021 dt.22-12-2021 2/3 (iii) An appropriate writ/order/direction, commanding the Respondent no. 3 to make payment of the full salary for the period commencing from 14.03.2021 upto the date as well as the admissible salary for the period under suspension of three months i.e. from 14.12.2020 upto 13.03.2021 within time frame, be issued;

(iv) Any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioners are entitled to be granted."

3. Under Rule 23 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 (for short 'Rules, 2005'), petitioner has statutory remedy of appeal against the order of suspension.

Rule 23 of the Rules, 2005 reads as under:

"23. Orders against which appeal lies. - A Government servant may prefer an appeal against order of suspension or order of punishment."

In para 24 of the pleadings, petitioner has stated as under:

"24. That the petitioner has no any other remedy equally efficacious and the remedy applied for is complete."

4. Today, during course of argument petitioner's counsel was asked as to whether he has statutory remedy of appeal or not? It is submitted that there is no remedy of appeal.

5. On the other hand, it is evident from the aforesaid

Patna High Court CWJC No.13966 of 2021 dt.22-12-2021 3/3 Rule 23 of the Rules, 2005 that petitioner has statutory remedy of appeal. Thus, the petitioner has mislead the Court in stating that he has no any other remedy equally efficacious and the remedy applied for is complete.

6. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed with cost of Rs. 10,000/-. The cost shall be paid in the account of Patna High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of one week. Petitioner is at liberty to prefer memorandum of appeal before the appellate authority within a period of two weeks from today. In the event of making such appeal, the appellate authority is hereby directed to decide petitioner's appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of petitioner's appeal.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) rakhi/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date