IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5933 of 2002 SATYA NARAYAN RAI Versus BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD& ors. For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Ambastha Mrs. Sudha Kumari For the Board : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh ----------- 4. 30.03.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Electricity Board. The petitioner as father-in-law was implicated in a case under Section 304 B and other provisions of the Penal Code. The trial is stated to be still pending. The petitioner was placed under suspension under Rule 99 of the Bihar Service Code. After his release from custody, fresh order of suspension under Rule 100 of the Bihar Service Code was passed. No departmental proceeding has been drawn thereafter. The additional ground is non-payment of subsistence allowance in accordance with law including the revision thereof pursuant to the enhancement of pay scale. The suspension cannot be a mode of punishment. Mere pendency of the criminal case unconnected with the official duty without initiating a departmental proceeding also for approximately eight and half years is not sustainable. The order of suspension of the petitioner is set aside. The Respondents are directed to ensure that he is paid all his arrears of subsistence allowance including any enhancement thereof whether under the provisions of the Bihar Service Code or 2 by virtue of enhancement of the pay scale. Let such arrears be paid to the petitioner within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)