IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6456 of 2011 Rabindra Kumar Sinha, son of late Nageshwar Pd. Sinha, resident of House of late Ashok Kumar Sinha, Behind Akhari Godown, Chhota Chowk,Muzaffarpur ---Petitioner. Versus 1. The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, West Gandhi Maidan,Patna (Bihar) 2. The Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Regional Office, Muzaffarpur. 3. The Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Muzaffarpur. 4. The Deputy General Manager-cum-Appellate Authority ( O & C) Network-1, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, West-Gandhi Maidan,Patna. 5. The Assistant General Manager (Administration), Disciplinary Authority, Region-1, Administrative Office, Club Road, Muzaffarpur. 6. The Assistant General-Manager-cum-officer, (Complaint Retirees) P.P.G. Department, State Bank of India, Central Office, Nariman Point, Mumbai. 7. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kanti Thermal Power, Station Branch, Kanti Muzaffarpur. ---Respondents. ----------- 03 15.07.2011 Heard Mr. Dr. Alok Kumar ‘Alok’ for the petitioner and Mr. S.D. Sanjay for the respondent. Petitioner seeks a direction upon the officials of the respondent State Bank of India ( for short ‘the Bank’) to grant him arrear of salary with interest for the period he was placed under suspension which was treated to be on duty by the order of the appellate authority as contained in Annexure-8. Petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 22.11.1985 (Annexure-2). His suspension was revoked by order dated 20.11.1992 (Annexure-3) but the salary and other allowances payable to the petitioner for the period of suspension was deferred till final order to be passed on the said proceeding. It appears that petitioner was also 2 facing criminal charge in which he was acquitted by judgment dated 19.03.2008 (Annexure-5). This order in the criminal proceeding came after his superannuation from service. In this situation, petitioner approached this Court by filing CWJC no. 7521 of 2010. After hearing the parties, this Court by a proceeding dated 14.05.2010 (Annexure-1) having appreciated the stand taken by the respondent Bank that appropriate decision shall be taken on his appeal by the competent authority within a reasonable time disposed of the case. The appellate authority of the respondent Bank by order dated 23.06.2010 (Annexure-8) disposed of the appeal in the following terms:- “…I am of the view that the period of suspension be treated as “on duty”, as a result of which he shall be entitled for the following consequential benefits only: i. He will be paid salary and allowances for the period of suspension minus the amount already paid during the period of suspension. ii. His period of suspension be counted for pension, PF and, Gratuity, if applicable.” It is admitted position that petitioner has already been paid salary for the period of suspension which was treated on duty. Petitioner now requires the respondent to grant him increment in the scale of pay for the period he was placed under suspension. The respondents have taken a stand that in view of the clear direction of the authority the increment was not allowed. However, Mr. Sanjay, learned counsel for the respondent Bank states that if an appropriate representation is filed the competent authority of the Bank shall consider the said claim of the petitioner also in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that a detailed 3 representation shall be filed seeking the aforesaid relief before the respondent No. 4 (Deputy General Manager-cum-Appellate Authority ( O &C) Network-1, State Bank of India). This Court, in view of the stand taken by the respondents, is not expressing any opinion on the merit of the claim of the petitioner in support whereof diverse submissions were advanced before this Court. In view of the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, the present application is disposed of by the following order:- Let petitioner file a detailed representation before the respondent No. 4 within a period of 04 weeks along with a copy of the present order whereafter said respondent shall consider and dispose of his representation in accordance with law within a period of 04 weeks of its filing. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )