Shashi Kant Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7247 of 2015 ====================================================== Shashi Kant Sharma Son of Shri Mohan Lal Sharma resident of Mathura, Road Near Sujata Hospital, Madhugari, P.s - Hathras (Kotwali) district _ hathras, Uttar Pradesh at present Posted at head office, District Rural Development Agency, Saharsa, Bihar .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Ruralk Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Bihar, Patna
3. The District Magistrate, Madhubani.
4. The Deputy Development Commissioner Saharsa. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manish Kumar, GP8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been placed under suspension on 31.3.2015 and that the memo of charge has already been framed against him but, then, keeping in view the nature of allegation as also the sufferings of the petitioner, prima facie at the instance of the then Prakhand Pramukh against whom the petitioner in capacity of Block Development Officer, Jhanjharpur Block had taken action for recovery of 24 lacks, this Court would deem it expedient in the ends of justice to direct the enquiry officer to conclude the departmental enquiry within a period of three months from the
Patna High Court CWJC No.7247 of 2015 (2) dt.24-07-2015 date of receipt of this order.
It goes without saying that on receipt of the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority shall also immediately take his decision within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt of the enquiry report.
It is made clear that if the disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner is not concluded in the aforesaid period, he will always have a liberty to move this Court again against his continued suspension.
With the aforesaid observation and direction this application is disposed of.
(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Rishi/- U