RAMA PRASAD PATHAK Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner. In spite of repeated calling, nobody appears for the State.

(2.) IN this writ application, petitioner has challenged Annexure -4 by which in the wake of conclusion of departmental proceeding against petitioner by giving him warning, it has been ordered that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any other payment of the suspension period except the subsistence allowance. Case of the petitioner is that at the relevant time he was posted as Revenue Karamchari in Baniyapur Anchal in the district of Saran. A departmental proceeding was initiated against him and he was put under suspension by Annexure -1 dated 15.3.2002. The departmental proceeding was finally closed by Annexure -2 dated 15.5.2002 by which only a warning was given to the petitioner and he was released from suspension. After release from suspension, petitioner was posted in another Anchal by Annexure -3 dated 1.2.2003. Thereafter, Annexure -4 has been issued on the orders of the Respondent Collector by which it has been held that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any other payment of his suspension period except the subsistence allowance.

(3.) SUBMISSION of learned counsel for the petitioner is that warning is no punishment under the Rules and therefore, departmental proceeding was closed without any punishment to the petitioner. He submits that withholding of any payment of the suspension period except the subsistence allowance is an independent punishment as per R. 97 of the Bihar Service Code which could not be imposed on the petitioner without issuing any show cause notice and without giving him any opportunity of hearing in the matter. In that view of the matter, order of the Collector, as contained in Annexure -4, withholding any other payment of the petitioner except the subsistence allowance for the period of his suspension is bad in law and in violation of principle of natural justice. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner has not been paid subsistence allowance for the period from 15.3.2002 to 14.5.2002 during which period he was under suspension. He further submits that the petitioner has not been paid his salary of the period from 1.3.2002 to 14.3.2002 i.e. prior to his suspension.