IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11094 of 2010 1. PHULESHWAR PRASAD MANDAL S/O LATE HARI MANDAL R/O VILL MUSKIPUR, P.O.JAMALPUR GOGARI, P.S.GOGARI, DISTT-KHAGARIA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR , PATNA 2. THE SECRETARY, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT VISHWASHARIYA BHAWAN, PATNA 3. BRAJESH MEHROTRA, SECRETARY, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT VISHWASHARIYA BHAWAN, PATNA 4. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT VISHWASHARIYA BHAWAN, PATNA 5. HRIDAYA NARAIN JHA, SPECIAL SECRETARY, BUILIDNG CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT VISHWASHARAIYA BHAWAN, PATNA 6. THE UNDER SECRETARY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT PATNA 7. GHANSHYAM RAM, UNDER SECRETARY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT PATNA 8. THE RESIDENT COMMISSIONER GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, BIHAR BHAWAN, 5 KAUTILYA MARG, NEW DELHI ----------- 2. 10.08.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29.6.2010 transferring him to Gardanibagh. It is submitted that the petitioner was posted at Bihar Bhawan, New Delhi when he came to be suspended by an order dated 15.2.2010 and his headquarters during suspension period was designated as the office of Superintending Engineer, Building Circle, Patna. The petitioner questioned the same in CWJC No. 5739 of 2010. On 19.4.2010 this Court stayed the operation of the order of suspension. The writ petition is stated to be still pending. Learned Counsel for the petitioner is correct in his submission that if the order of suspension has been stayed the order fixing the headquarter at Patna during period of suspension automatically also vanishes. The petitioner is first required to be permitted to join at Bihar Bhawan, New Delhi and thereafter the matter may proceed afresh in accordance with law. This Court finds that the impugned order dated 29.6.2010 proceeds on a completely wrong premise when in column 4 it describes him as a person relieved from suspension. This Court has already held that the petitioner stands reinstated in his service at Bihar Bhawan, New Delhi and column 4 should have made a correct recitals of his present status and in absence of which the present impugned order is not sustainable. The order dated 29.6.2010 is quashed in so far as the petitioner alone is concerned, without prejudice to the rights of the respondents. The writ application stands allowed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)