BIRENDRA KUMAR SINHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was suspended under Rule 99 of the Bihar Service Code, 1952, (hereinafter referred to as the Code), vide order dated 27th January, 2003, as he was taken into custody in pursuance of a criminal case. The said order of suspension was revoked, vide Memo No. 667, dated 5th May, 2003. Subsequently, he was suspended under Rule 100 of the Code, vide Memo No.1310, dated 2nd June, 2003. Again the order of suspension was revoked, vide Memo No. 2038, dated 13th July, 2004, on his getting bail.

(2.) FROM the affidavit of the respondents, it appears that a criminal case is still pending and no final decision has been taken. The petitioner being a Class III employee was suspended on account of his having taken into custody and because of the pendency of the criminal case. On having been released from the custody, though it was open for the authority to revoke the suspension, but it was not open for the Special Secretary to suggest whether the period would be counted towards duty or he would get full salary of the said period, as observed in Memo No. 2038, dated 13th July, 2004. Only when a legal proceeding comes to an end, it can be determined under Rule 97 of the Code as to how the period of suspension to be treated and what salary to which the charged employee is entitled. If an employee is acquitted from the criminal proceeding, he may claim for counting the period towards duty and for full salary. On the other hand, if the employee is convicted, it is open for the competent authority to pass appropriate order under Rule 97(2) of the Code.

(3.) SO far as the claim for payment of medical bills and other dues are concerned, the respondents will pass a reasoned order on the application as may be preferred by the petitioner and will pay the admitted dues, it found payable, within two months from the date of receipt of such representation. In case of any adverse decision, the authority will communicate the grounds therefor.