IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12196 of 2009 RAM NIRANJAN CHOUDHARY, Son of Sri Lakshman Choudhary, Resident of Village+P.O. Rahimpur, P.S.- Khagaria in the District of Khagaria :------- Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Under Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna :---- Respondents. ----------- 2. 15.09.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed supplementary affidavit which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 3. Petitioner is a Deputy Collector and at the relevant time was serving as a Block Development Officer. He is aggrieved by the resolution of the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department of the State Government bearing Memo No. 1524 dated 12.3.2009, Annexure-1, whereunder he has been placed under suspension with reference to the provisions contained in Rule 9(1)(a) of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”) on the allegation that he made payments to the beneficiaries of the Indira Housing Scheme through the PACS of which the beneficiaries were members and not through a nationalized bank in violation of the relevant circular of the State Government. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without going into the correctness or otherwise of the allegations suffice it to submit that the PACS also functions through bank accounts of the members opened in - 2 - the nationalized bank or in the Co-operative bank or in the Gramin bank and if the payments have been made through the bank account nothing wrong has been committed in the light of the circular of the Government. It is further submitted that continued suspension of the petitioner is violative of the provisions contained in Sub-Rule (7) of Rule 9 of the Rules as till date neither the period of suspension has been extended nor petitioner has been served with the memo of charge and highlighting the aforesaid aspect of the matter petitioner has already represented before the Government under representation dated 17.06.2009, as contained in Annexure-3 to this application. 5. Let the State Government consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.6.2009, Annexure-3 in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and pass a reasoned order in case the Government is not inclined to release the petitioner from suspension. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that till date he has not been paid any subsistence allowance. Let the competent authority of the State Government ensure payment of the subsistence allowance to the petitioner as per the Rules within the same time. 6. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)