SATYA BARDHAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.5.1999 communicating to the petitioner that he shall be entitled only for subsistence allowance for the period of suspension.

(2.) FACTS giving rise to the present application are that while the petitioner was posted as Medical Officer at Primary Health Centre, Dhanarua, by order dated 3.11.1987, he was put under suspension. Later on, by order dated 3.6.1988 (Annexure -2), a departmental proceeding was initiated against him under Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. The misconduct alleged against that petitioner is that he never used to stay at the place of his posting, that is, the Primary Health Centre, Dhanarua but stay somewhere else leading to deprivation of medical aid to the patients. Further misconduct alleged against the petitioner is that he used to be unauthorisedly absent from the place of posting. Petitioner submitted his reply and the Inquiry Officer submitted its report dated 16.5.1990 (Annexure -4) but did not find the petitioner guilty of misconduct alleged against him.

(3.) LATER on, by letter dated 12.2.1998, the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why no emoluments be paid to him for the period of suspension, i.e. 16.1.1990 to 11.9.1997 as also other punishment on the purported allegation that although the Inquiry Officer has submitted its report dated 16.1.1990, but the same was destroyed in April, 1992 and the petitioner did not bring the fact of submission of the report by the Inquiry Officer to the State Government and filed application for revocation of order of suspension after seven years. This according to the respondents showed his intention to prolong the period of suspension. Petitioner filed his reply and by the impugned order dated 24.5.1999 (Annexure -1), the State Government decided that no emoluments shall be paid to the petitioner for the period of suspension.