SHANKAR RAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.

(2.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondents.

(3.) The Petitioner was subjected to departmental proceeding which he questioned in C.W.J.C. No. 8631/09. In the meantime, pursuant to his superannuation, the proceedings had been converted into one under Section 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules. This Court declined to interfere with the departmental proceedings, but granted liberty on 25.7.2009 to approach this Court again if the proceedings were not concluded within four months, provided that the delay was not attributable to the Petitioner. The counter affidavit acknowledges that the Petitioner submitted his written defence before the Enquiry Officer on 21.8.2009 and also appeared on 2.2.2010 i.e. less than a month after the order of this Court. Paragraph-14 of the counter affidavit ascribes the delay in completion of the proceedings as attributable to the Respondents alone making no statement of any contributory delay by the Petitioner.