RAM DULAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shashi Shekhar Prasad Sinha, learned Assisting Counsel to G.P.-9 for the State.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the authorities in depriving him of his pay and allowances by restricting the same to the subsistence allowance drawn by him under the order bearing memo no.2375 dated 4.11.2004 (Annexure-7) issued under the signature of the District, Superintendent of Education, Rohtas Sasaram. The petitioner also prays for' payment of the increment admissible to him in July, 2004 which was denied to him for the reasons that as he was under suspension and his pay and allowances were restricted to the subsistence allowance hence, he was not entitled to the increment due in July, 2004, as it fell within the suspension period.

(3.) The facts leading to the present situation is eloquent from an order appended at Annexure-G of the counter affidavit of the District Superintendent of Education, Sasaram contained in memo no.467 dated 5.10.2006. It appears that the petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, was deputed for election duty during the Lok Sabha Election, 2004 but he did not chose to accept the said posting as communicated under letter no.369 dated 13.4.2004 of the Block Development Officer, Nasriganj. For the failure in cooperating with the election duty, the petitioner was put under suspension under the orders of the District Magistrate-cum-District Election Officer, Rohtas as contained in memo no.466 dated 10.5.2004 (Annexure- 1). Following the order of suspension, the Block Education Officer, Nokha was appointed as the Enquiry Officer to inquire into the allegation of dereliction of duty by the petitioner who submitted his report on 17.9.2004 placed on the records of the proceedings vide Annexure-L to the third supplementary counter affidavit filed by the District Superintendent of Education, Sasaram.