SURESH PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 9.2.1990 and the consequential orders dated 3.2.2000, 28.9.2001 and 19.2.2002 which are the order of punishment and the appellate and memorial orders.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 5.5.1988 was bad inasmuch as it treats him under retrospective suspension with effect from 16.4.1984; that there could be no retrospective order of suspension.

(3.) THE petitioner appears to have gone on leave without sanction. He applied for subsequent sanction which appears to have been granted when it was discovered that he has concealed that during this period of absence he had been taken into custody in a private dispute on 16.4.1984 and was released on 17.4.1984. For this act of his, of concealment, he was proceeded with departmentally. In the departmental enquiry he was held guilty of concealment and it was held that he was not entitled to the suspension allowance for the period of suspension from 16.4.1984 till the date of order in the departmental proceeding when the suspension was revoked i.e. 6.2.1990.