Rajeev Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18795 of 2016 =========================================================== Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Son of late Hazari Lal Gupta, presently residing at Flat No. 202, Triveni Niwas, Ram Krishna Avenue Road, Rajendra Nagar, P.O. - Rajendra Nagar, P.S.- Kadamkuan, Town- Patna, District- Patna- 800016 (Bihar). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. Secretary (Expenditure), Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. Joint Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra, District- Saran (Bihar).

6. Kameshwar Ojha, Son of not known Deputy Budget Controller -cum- Deputy Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

7. Chandra Prakash, Son of not known, Deputy Budget Controller -cum- Deputy Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Giri, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rohitab Das, AC to AAG10 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 01-09-2017 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

It is stated by Mr. Rohitab Das, learned Assisting Counsel to Additional Advocate General No.10 that the order of suspension of the petitioner has been revoked on the conclusion of the disciplinary proceeding which has resulted in imposition of minor punishment. The order also stipulates that the petitioner would not be entitled to any other allowance other than the subsistence allowance drawn during the suspension period. Considering that the writ petition was filed questioning the

Patna High Court CWJC No.18795 of 2016 dt.01-09-2017 order of suspension and while during the pendency of the writ petition final orders have been passed in the disciplinary proceeding which order also revokes the suspension of the petitioner, the prayer in so far as the present case is concerned has been rendered infructuous and the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to question the punishment order in an appropriate proceeding.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 06-09-2017 Transmission Date NA