IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3581 of 2008 SHIVA KANT PASWAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 05/ 02.7.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police. He is aggrieved by the District Order No. 125/06, bearing Memo. No. 192 dated 6.2.2006, as contained in Annexure-2 to this application, whereudner he has been placed under suspension for defalcation of Rs. 66,44,899.50. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the suspension order, Annexure-2 has been passed by the Superintendent of Police, Jamui after he was transferred to Begusarai under Munger Area Order No. 140/05, in compliance whereto, he was commanded to join at Begusarai, vide Command dated 24.9.2005 and, accordingly, he submitted his joining at Begusarai on 26.9.2005 at 12.45 P.M. and according to the petitioner once he jointed at Begusarai, the Superintendent of Police, Jamui has no jurisdiction to place him under suspension and the suspension order, Annexure-2 be quashed on that ground alone. 4. Counsel for the State, Sri D. N. Yadav, AAG 6 has opposed the prayer with reference to the averments made in the counter affidavit. According to him, petitioner having joined at Begusarai on 26.9.2005, is not appearing before the competent authority so as to enable the authority to proceed with the proceeding for recovery of the amount defalcated by him and the authorities in - 2 - order to ensure his attendance before the competent authority at Begusarai have passed District Order No. 1033/06, bearing Memo. No. 1397 dated 5.6.2006, Annexure-A to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent no.5 to ensure that the petitioner deposits the defalcated amount. Further, the I.G. Bhagalpur has passed directions to register FIR against the petitioner alleging defalcation of the aforesaid amount which is contained in Memo. No. 845 dated 22.5.2006, Annexure-B to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent no. 5. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in rejoinder, has submitted that petitioner having joined at Begusarai on 26.9.2005, is discharging his duties not only at Begusarai but also is appearing in the office of the Superintendent of Police, Jamui where the departmental proceeding for defalcation of the amount of Rs. 66,44,899.50 is pending. 6. It appears, on account of the fact that the proceeding to establish defalcation at the instance of the petitioner of Rs. 66,44,899.50 is pending at Jamui, petitioner is not always appearing before the competent authority at Begusarai. 7. In the circumstances, after quashing the order of suspension dated 6.2.2006, Annexure-2 as without jurisdiction, I direct the petitioner to appear before the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai along with a certified copy of this order on 14.7.2008 and the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai should ensure that the proceeding to ascertain defalcation of Rs. 66,44,899.50 at the instance - 3 - of the petitioner is conducted and taken to its logical end within a reasonable time and if it is concluded that petitioner is responsible for the defalcation of the aforesaid amount or any other amount, then appropriate orders be passed for recovery of the amount, but until the departmental proceeding for defalcation is not concluded, no recovery be made from the petitioner and he be paid arrears of salary for the period of suspension as the suspension order, Annexure-2 has been held to be without jurisdiction with liberty to the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai to place the petitioner under suspension during the pendency of the enquiry proceeding for defalcation. 8. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)