KEDAR PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner has prayed for quash -ing of the order of suspension as contained in annexure -2 dated 20th November, 2000.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein no satisfactory explanation has been given as to how the petitioner is continuing under suspension in absence of a departmental proceeding. No further explanation has also been given in the counter affidavit as to under what circumstances the permissible subsistence allowance as required in law has not been paid to the petitioner. From the tenor of the counter affidavit, however, it appears that the order of suspension is continuing in contemplation of a departmental proceeding which ultimately till date has not been drawn per se it appears that the petitioner is continuing under suspension since 20th November, 2000 and even after a lapse of four years the order of suspension has not been revoked in the like manner it has been done in the case of Deo Chandra Choudhary, as referred to above.