IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6222 of 2009 Bandana Devi, Wife of Arbind Kumar, Resident of Village Mirchaibari, Teja Tola, Police Station and District Katihar. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The District Magistrate, Katihar. 3. The District Programme Officer, Katihar. 4. The Child Development Project Officer, Katihar. 5. The District Welfare Officer, Katihar. 6. The Deputy Director, Welfare Purnea Division, Purnea. 7. Lady Supervisor, Mirchaibari, Das Tola Ward no. 3, Katihar. 8. Ward Commissioner, Mirchaibari, Teja Tola West, Ward No.3, Katihar. -------- Respondents ----------- 2 18.5.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. While it is true that the appointing authority is always vested with a power to initiate a disciplinary proceeding and to that extent also place the person under suspension pending such enquiry but then the life of such suspension order cannot be stretched to an uncertain end. In the present case, the petitioner, an Angan Bari Sevika, has been placed under suspension by an order dated 6.11.2008 (Annexure-2) on the ground of certain discrepancy including the petitioner being herself remaining absent from her centre during course of inspection of Deputy Director 2 of Welfare, Purnea Division, Purnea. The petitioner in fact had filed her reply on 12.11.2008 as is apparent from a copy thereof (Annexure-3) denying the allegations as also raising certain pleas with regard to her being on duty. The grievance of the petitioner is that though a period of seven months have already elapsed but the competent authority has not passed the final order either revoking the suspension or even inflicting any other punishment. Since the power of removal of Angan Bari Sevika in the year 2006 scheme was vested with the Collector of the district, this Court without adjudicating as to whether this order of suspension passed by the District Program Officer in view of certain amendments made in the policy is justified or not, would direct the Collector of the district to look into the grievance of the petitioner and if he would find that enquiry cannot be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, he would pass an order revoking the order of suspension without 3 prejudiced to the continuance of the departmental enquiry. On the other hand, if Collector of the district could get the enquiry itself disposed of within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, the consequential adverse order, if any, passed against the petitioner, will have to be made subject matter of an appeal before the Commissioner of the Division. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is finally disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)