IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14589 of 2009 1. MADHAV MALLIK S/O LATE DIGAMBER MALLIK R/V RAMPUR, P.S. MADHAWAPUR, DISTT.- MADHUBANI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF 3. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, (ESTABLISHMENT) NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF 4. THE TREASURY OFFICER TREASURY OF NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF ----------- 2. 16.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The law stands well settled that there can be no retrospective suspension. Custody may lead to a deemed suspension in law which lapses on release unless there be a fresh order of suspension. There can be no subsequent order of suspension giving retrospective effect from the date of custody to continue even after release. The order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 13687 of 2007 has to be given its full effect. This Court holds as follows:- (a) for the period that the petitioner was in custody, he is not entitled to anything beyond subsistence allowance. (b) After his release from custody, no fresh order of suspension having been passed retrospective suspension is not permissible in law. (c) This Court construes the order dated 10.11.2004 in a manner to set aside the suspension from the date of release i.e., 29.8.2002 till 10.11.2004 and upholds the order of suspension as prospective from 10.11.2004. 2 The submission of the petitioner that there has been no departmental proceeding against him since the date 10.11.2004, the suspension of the petitioner even if deemed prospective may not be sustainable in law now. The writ application is disposed with direction to the authorities to consider all the aforesaid facts and then pass a reasoned and speaking order on the claims of the petitioner and pay his legitimate dues, if any, within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)