SHAMBHU KUMAR SISODIYA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner makes a limited prayer in the present writ application wherein he is aggrieved by the fact that despite his giving joining on 23.9.2003, after his release from jail, his joining has not been accepted and he is not being permitted to work since he was released by the High Court. His contention is that after his release in terms of Rule 99 of the Bihar Service Code he ought to have been permitted to continue on duty as a matter of right, unless the State Government has passed any order of suspension under Rule 100 as provided therein.

(3.) THE contention of the petitioner is that there is no order under Rule 100 and in that view of the matter he ought to be treated on duty and should be allowed to work and function as a Government servant and in this regard he is relying on a judgment reported in 1993(2) PLJR 597 in the case of Vidya Singh vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. A Division Bench of this Court in the abovementioned case has categorically held that the law - mandates passing of a suspension order under Rule 100. of the Bihar Service Code.and in absence of any order under Rule 100, the suspension of the Government employee would be deemed to have been revoked and he would be treated to be on duty after giving his joining.