IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15456 of 2010 GAURI SHANKAR JHA . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 3. 4.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner questions his order of suspension dated 5.4.2010. It is not in controversy that he has requested for revocation on 19.7.2010 on the ground that charge had not been framed under Rule 9(7) C.C.A. Rules, 2005 within three months from the date of suspension. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. Dealing with Paragraph-16 of the writ application raising this issue of fact and law, the respondents have not denied the same. Annexure-16 to the writ application shows that the charges have been framed on 22.9.2010. Whether it be the issue of revocation of suspension in pursuance of his request made after three months and before framing of charges as ruled by the Full Bench decision reported in 2009(4) PLJR 272 or that he has been suspended on 5.4.2010 with regard to an occurrence of the year 2002-03, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition is fit to 2 be allowed. If the respondents contend that the allegations related to financial misdemeanor it is for them to explain why no action was taken for 8 long years. The writ application is allowed. The order of suspension dated 5.4.2010 is set aside. The petitioner is held entitled to his subsistence allowance for the period of suspension in accordance with law to be paid within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. This Court makes no observations with regard to the conduct of the departmental proceeding which shall continue on its own merits, in accordance with law. The writ application stands allowed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)