IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15347 of 2010 RAJENDRA PRASAD GUPTA . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2. 24.9.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Assailing the order of suspension dated 26.4.2010 it is submitted that it is not only vague but is speculative in nature. Counsel for the State submits that the petitioner may represent for revocation. Charges have already been framed. The order of suspension is vague when it states that he has committed some irregularities. What the irregularities are is not mentioned in the suspension order. The suspension further goes on to state that if it is proved he may be liable to major punishment. This Court upholds the submission of the counsel for the petitioner that even the latter part of the order is speculative when the authorities appeared unsure of themselves with regard to the unstated irregularities committed by the petitioner. In the entirety, this Court is not persuaded to uphold the order of suspension. The order dated 26.4.2010 is accordingly quashed. 2 This Court has made no observation and given no direction with regard to the departmental proceedings. The application is allowed to the extent indicated above. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)