IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5007 of 2000 AMARENDRA KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4/ 14/8/2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The claim in this writ application is for certain arrears of salary for the period 2.112.1992 to 7.6.1995. The claims can be divided into three periods. The first being 2.12.1992 to 8.2.1993 when the petitioner claims to have made an application for leave and proceeded on leave without any formal orders in that regard, a period of alleged unauthorized absence. Secondly, 9.12.1993 to 3.4.1995, alleged to be a period waiting for posting and thirdly 1.5.1995 to 7.6.1995 when the petitioner claims that he fell sick and has submitted necessary papers in that regard before the authorities. There are certain recommendations with regard to the petitioner as appended at Annexure-11 on which, for the period in question, it is submitted, no final decision has been taken upon the same. Counter affidavit has been filed on - 2 - behalf of the respondents. Paragraph-7 of the same read along with Annexure-D reflects a departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner for unauthorized absence. Neither the petitioner nor the respondents have brought the memo of charges on record. In his reply to the counter affidavit the petitioner does not deny the factum of the departmental proceedings, but seeks to question the same as being unjustified and barred by law. Learned counsel for the State submits that contrary to participating in the departmental proceeding, the petitioner is evading appearance. Be that as it may, if there is a departmental proceeding against the petitioner, the question of passing any orders for salary for the period which may be the subject matter of the departmental proceeding simply does not arise. The writ application is therefore disposed with the direction to the respondents to examine the memo of charges and of the periods for which salary is claimed, as noticed above, if any period be outside the memo of - 3 - charges, then, unless there be valid justification in law for the same, the respondents on such consideration are obliged to release the salary dues for that limited period. The writ application is allowed to the extent indicated and other claims of the petitioner shall necessarily abide by the final decision in the pending departmental proceeding KC ( Navin Sinha,J )