IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6807 of 2010 1. Virendra Narayan Sharma S/O Late Vansh Narayan Sharma R/O Vill.- Dihari, P.S.- Rajpur, Distt.- Buxar Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Building Construction Department, Bisveshwaraya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 2. The Joint Secretary-Cum-Chief Vigilance Officer Building Construction Department, Bisveshwaraya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Anand Kr. Mishra, Adv. For the State:- Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Adv. ----------- 4. 19.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made a very short submission questioning the impugned order dated 8.10.2009. It is submitted that the order is bad in so far as it purports to suspend the petitioner retrospectively with effect from 22.5.2009 urging that suspension is not a punishment. Counsel for the State has rightly urged that if an order is severable, the valid part of the order shall still survive while striking down the invalid part. There can be no gainsaying that a retrospective order of suspension is an anachronism as explained in 1991 (suppl) (2) SCC 127. The Court therefore holds that the impugned order is bad in so 2 far as it purports to suspend the petitioner retrospectively from 22.5.2009. Equally, if an order is severable and the good part of the order can be separated from the bad part of the order, and the order can still survive in the law, the Court shall segregate the grain from the chafe. The Court therefore holds that the impugned order dated 8.10.2009 is bad in so far as it purports to suspend the petitioner retrospectively from 22.5.2009. The order is held to be valid prospectively from 8.10.2009. The petitioner is held entitled to relief consequentially. The writ application is allowed only to the extent indicated. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)