IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.369 of 2007 Shree Krishna Sharma son of Late Basgit Sharma, Assistant Package Block Office Charpokhari, resident of Mohalla- Motitila, Post Office and Police Station- Ara Town, District- Bhojpur. ………….Petitioner- Appellant. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Director, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Joint Director, Agriculture (Adoptive Research Bihar, Patna. 4. Joint Director, Agriculture, Patna Division, Patna. 5. The Deputy Director of Agriculture, (General), Patna Division, Patna. 6. The Deputy Director (Prakshetra) Division, Ara District Bhojpur. 7. The District Agriculture Officer, Bhojpur, Ara. 8. The District Agriculture Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram. 9. The Assistant Soil Chemist Soil Testing Laboratory, Ara District Bhojpur. 10. Project Executive Officer at Karaghar, District Rohtas. 11. The Sub- Divisional Agriculture Officer, Buxar District- Buxar. …………….. Respondents- Respondents. ----------- For the Appellant: Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh & Mr. Balmiki Pandey Bhashkar, Advocates. For the Respondent- State: Mr. Ashok Kumar Keshri, A.A.G. XI. …………. 07 29.07.2011 The present Letters Patent Appeal arises out of order dated 19.03.2007 passed in C.W.J.C. No.7620 of 2000. The appellant being the writ petitioner had chosen to question the order of punishment dated 15.4.1997 (Annexure-16 to the writ petition) whereby the punishment imposed as follows:- The Charges leveled against the appellant is at Annexure-9 to the writ petition which reads as follows:- (i)Refusal to hand over charge of the stores and the records to the named person even after he was relieved from the office consequent upon his transfer. 2 (ii)A month or two prior to his retirement, he had misbehaved with the employees in the office in a state of intoxication. Oral and written warnings did not have any effect on him. An enquiry was conducted in which charges against the appellant have been proved. The learned Single has observed that there was lots of litigation and the appellant had approached this Court on the earlier occasion also by filing a writ petition. But, however, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has very emphatically argued that although the appellant had gone to report before the authority but the authority did not allow him to join the transferred post and he was continued under suspension for a long period of ten years. The aforesaid fact has been disputed by the Learned Government Pleader, stating that, the appellant never reported to the authority on the transferred post and secondly in a drunken condition the appellant had disturbed a lady staff. However, we are not inclined to go into the merits of the aforesaid charges at this stage, but as the appellant was continued under suspension for a long time, on the background of the findings of the Enquiry Officer with regard to being guilty of the charge, we are of the opinion that the suspension period should be counted for the purpose of payment of pension and other retirement benefits. 3 With the above observation this L.P.A. stands disposed of. Abhay Kumar ( T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)