IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1411 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3757 of 2011 With Interlocutory Application No. 6780 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1411 of 2011. ====================================================== Md. Mehtab Alam @ Mahatab Alam, S/o Late Sharfuddin, R/o Village – Bairya, P.S. – Azamnagar, District - Katihar .... .... Petitioner / Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Katihar 3. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Katihar 4. The Block Development Officer, Amdabad, Katihar, Dist. Katihar 5. The Block Development Officer, Pranpur, Katihar 6. The Sub Divisional Officer, Barsoi, Dist. - Karihar .... .... Respondents – Respondents. ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Jawahar Prasad Karn, AAG 4 and Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, AC to AAG 4. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 28-09-2011 Re. Interlocutory Application No. 6780 of 2011. The delay of 19 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1411 of 2011. This Appeal preferred under Clause 10 of the Patna High Court LPA No.1411 of 2011 (2) dt.28-09-2011 2 / 4 2 Letters Patent arises from the order dated 12th July 2011 made by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 3757 of 2011. The appellant, the writ petitioner, is the Panchayat Secretary. For alleged act of insubordination, by order dated 23rd November 2010 made by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Katihar, the appellant has been placed under suspension on the ground that the appellant did not comply with the directions issued by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Katihar. His challenge to the order of suspension has been rejected by the learned single Judge. Therefore, the present Appeal. Evidently, the appellant has been suspended from service in contemplation of disciplinary proceeding. Learned Advocate Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman has appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that till date no disciplinary proceeding has been initiated against the appellant. We are informed that the conditions of service of Panchayat employees are governed by the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as `the Rules’). Sub rule (7) of Rule 9 of the Rules provides for framing of charge sheet within three months from the date of suspension failing which the suspension order shall be revoked. The said Sub rule (7) of Rule 9 of the Rules reads as under: “(7) Charge-sheet must be framed within three months from the date of issue of suspension order failing which on expiry of three months, the suspension order shall be revoked unless the authority, which issued the suspension order, Patna High Court LPA No.1411 of 2011 (2) dt.28-09-2011 3 / 4 3 passes the order renewing the suspension along with reasons to be recorded in writing for the delay in framing of charge-sheet for a further period of four months : Provided that after the expiry of extended period four months the suspension order shall stand revoked if the charge-sheet is not framed.” Admittedly, neither the charge sheet has been framed against the appellant within three months as envisaged by the aforesaid sub rule (7) of Rule 9 of the Rules nor the period of suspension has expressly been extended. Even after expiry of more than seven months specified in the said sub rule (7) of Rule 9 of the Rules, the charge sheet has not been framed. The order of suspension made against the appellant shall, therefore, be revoked by application of the said sub rule (7) of Rule 9 of the Rules. Moreover, we find that the allegation made against the appellant is not such that should invite order of suspension. Neither the appellant is likely to be repeating the same act of misconduct; nor there is a possibility of tampering with the evidence as the allegation is based on the official records. For the aforesaid reasons, we allow this Appeal. The impugned order dated 12th July 2011 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 3757 of 2011 is set aside. CWJC No. 3757 of 2011 is allowed. The order dated 23rd November 2010 made by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Katihar placing the appellant under suspension is quashed and set aside. The appellant will be reinstated in service forthwith. The respondent District Panchayat Raj Officer, Katihar is expected to commence and complete the disciplinary Patna High Court LPA No.1411 of 2011 (2) dt.28-09-2011 4 / 4 4 enquiry contemplated against the appellant at the earliest preferably within six months from today. The question of payment of difference in salary for the period spent under suspension will be considered at the time of completion of the enquiry. Parties will bear their own cost. Dilip. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)