RABINDRA KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing an order of suspension (Annexure -1) and for a direction that pending the criminal case, which has been lodged against the petitioner, the departmental proceeding should be stayed.

(2.) When this application was taken up for admission, the learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, took a stand that he is not pressing the application so far the order of suspension is concerned. He, however, urged that as the charges levelled against the petitioner in the criminal case and the departmental proceeding are identical, the departmental proceeding should await till the criminal court gives its verdict in respect of the allegations made against the petitioner. It was pointed out on behalf of the petitioner that the main charge which has been levelled against the petitioner in the departmental proceeding is that the loan had been scheduled caste and scheduled tribe, but they were actually paid much less than what had been sanctioned for them and this petitioner along with others deducted amounts between 3,000 to 5,000 from different applicants. It was urged that in respect of the aforesaid charge a first information report has also been lodged.

(3.) The learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondent -Bihar State Co -operative Land Development Bank Ltd. and its Administrator, pointed out that the criminal case has been lodged against the petitioner only for having deducted and misappropriated substantial amounts from loan sanctioned to different persons, but in the departmental proceeding five charges have been levelled against the petitioner.