IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9167 of 2010 1. THAKUR RABINDRA KUMAR, DY. DIRECTOR (PERSONNEL), BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD (PESU), PATNA S/O THAKUR JAGADISH CHANDRA R/O MOH B-11, BSEB COLONY, NEW PUNAICHAK, P.S. SHASTRINAGAR, DISTT-PATNA Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THROUGH ITS SECRETARY PATNA 2. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD PATNA 3. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENERGY DEPARTMENT, PATNA. ----------- 4. 12.07.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”). 2. This writ application has been filed asserting that petitioner is to superannuate on 31st July, 2010 yet the departmental proceeding initiated against him and directed to be concluded by this Court by September, 2008 has not yet been concluded and the result is that petitioner continued to languish in suspension and sealed cover in which recommendation for his promotion is kept is not being opened. 3. Counsel for the Board submitted that the enquiry initiated against the petitioner could not be concluded as Director General, Vigilance of the Board, the Enquiry Officer against the petitioner appointed by this Court, has since been transferred and successor of the Director General, Vigilance has not yet joined the Board, in the circumstances, the enquiry initiated against the petitioner has not been concluded. The Director General, Vigilance was transferred from the Board on 26.2.2009 and since then till date the Director General, Vigilance has not been posted, as such, the proceeding initiated against the petitioner could not be concluded and he continued to languish in suspension on the charge of misbehaviour with the Chairman of the Board. 4. From the counter affidavit it appears that the Board has adopted the circular of the State Government dated 11.9.2002, whereunder liberty is - 2 - allowed to the Departmental Promotion Committee to consider the case of a delinquent employee for promotion and to keep the recommendation of the promotion in a sealed cover and if the proceeding is not concluded within a reasonable time to again consider the matter. In the light of the said circular the Departmental Promotion Committee considered the case of the petitioner for promotion on 30.12.2009 as has been stated in paragraph-13 of the counter affidavit but considering the fact that proceeding has not been concluded the recommendations were kept in the sealed cover. 5. Now, the petitioner is to superannuate on 31st July, 2010 and till date no Director General, Vigilance has been posted in the Board, in the circumstances, the proceeding taken against the petitioner cannot be concluded before his retirement. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties, it is directed that the competent authority in the Board should consider the case of the petitioner for vacating his suspension as also for grant of ad hoc promotion as per the contents of Paragraphs- 6 and 7 of the circular letter dated 11.9.2002. The authorities of the Board should pass appropriate orders in the light of the directions contained in this order and the resolution of the Government dated 11.9.2002, as early as possible, in any case within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the competent authority in the Board. 7. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)