SHIVA NARAYAN LAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE same petitioner has filed these two writ petitions, seeking different reliefs in this same set of facts and circumstances. These two petitions were, therefore, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THE relevant facts, in brief, can be stated thus. In 1978 -79 while the petitioner was posted as Executive Engineer in Saran Canal Division, Gandak Project, he gave work orders for an aggregate sum of about Rs. 10 lacs. The work orders were given on nomination basis and without inviting tenders. According to the petitioner the total amount was spread over 90 work order each of which was for a sum under Rs. 25,000/ -, that it was within his competence to give work order for a sum not exceeding Rs. 25,000/ - without inviting tenders and further that the works in question were of emergency nature and the facts and circumtances in each case justified the issuance of the work order by -passing the lengthy procedure of inviting tenders etc. He was, however, put under suspension by order, dated 14.8.1982 in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding on the charges of insubordination and abuse of his official position and further that his action in making allotment of 90 pieces of work on the basis of nomination was intended to cause financial loss to the Government and financial gain to himself and the contractors.

(3.) AS directed, charge sheet was given to the petitioner on the date, the aforesaid order was passed. He submitted his reply to the charge sheet on 16.9.1985. A departmental enquiry was held to investigate into the charges and the enquiry officer submitted his report on 29.10.1985, i.e. well within the period of three months fixed by the High Court for the conclusion of the proceeding. Admittedly, however, no final order was passed in the disciplinary proceeding till 15.12.1985 on which date the three months ' period from the date of submission of the petitioner 's reply to the charge sheet came to an end. Therefore, by virtue of the High Court 's order as quoted above, the petitioner would be deemed to have been released from suspension w.e.f. 16.12.1985 though no order, revoking suspension was passed by the departmental authorities.