RAJA RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The appellant, Assistant Engineer in the Irrigation Department was apprehended in a case of Prevention of Corruption Act and thereafter, on 9th May, 2008 an order was passed under Rule 99 of the Jharkhand Service Code suspending the writ petitioner-appellant from the date when he was arrested i.e., from 18.3.2008. The appellant was released on bail on 19.5.2008. The appellant's contention is that this order suspending the appellant was specifically passed under Rule 99. According to the appellant, suspension under Rule 99 comes to an end automatically upon accused employee released on bail and in view of the judgment of the Patna High Court delivered in the case of Satyanarayan Prasad Shrivastava Vs. State of Bihar and others,1978 BBCJ 208, delivered in the case of Sidhinath Jha Vs. State of Bihar,1988 PLJR 1129 and delivered in the case of Vidya Singh Vs. State of Bihar,1994 BBCJ 64, the authorities if wish to suspend the appellant, they are required to pass fresh order under Rule 100.

(3.) The appellant's above contention was rejected by learned Single Judge, holding that in the order of suspension Rule 99 has wrongly been mentioned and in fact suspension order is under Rule 100 of the Jharkhand Service Code. Hence petitioner-appellant has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.