IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2934 of 2009 Deolok Mishra, son of Vedakant Mishra, resident of village – Ram Nagar, P.S. – Sikty (Bardaha), P.O. – Jamua, District – Araria, at present working as Headmaster, Middle School, Madhubani Colony, Purnea, District - Purnea …………….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Bihar 3. Director, Primary Education Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. Regional Deputy Director, Education, Purnea, District – Purnea 5. Collector, Purnea 6. District Superintendent of Education, Purnea, District – Purnea 7. Sub-divisional Education Officer, Purnea, District – Purnea 8. Range Education Officer, Purnea, District – Purnea 9. Block Education Extension Officer, Sadar Purnea, District- Purnea ………………… Respondents ---------------------------------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Sarangdhar Jha, Advocate For the State: Mr. Amarnath Deo, SC-10 ********** 06. 08.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. In response to the direction of this Court, dated 29.08.2011, the District Education Officer, Purnea is physically present in Court. He has also filed his Counter Affidavit. Petitioner has prayed for quashing of the Order, dated 07.08.2008, issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Purnea, whereby petitioner has been put under suspension in 2 contemplation of the departmental proceeding. Charges were framed against the petitioner, but as stated in the Counter Affidavit, he did not submit his show-cause and there was complete non-cooperation from the petitioner’s side. However, the departmental proceeding has now concluded, awarding certain punishment against the petitioner. In view of the statement made in the Counter Affidavit, the prayer of the petitioner regarding revocation of suspension has become infructuous as while awarding punishment in the departmental proceeding, the suspension of petitioner has been revoked. Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has not been paid his subsistence allowance, for which he is entitled on account of remaining in suspension. Counsel, appearing for the State, submits that petitioner never joined his headquarter, as such subsistence allowance was not paid to him. Considering the developments, taken place, the petitioner will now give his joining before the District Education Officer, Purnea within one week from today. He will be paid his subsistence allowance for the entire period of suspension within two weeks 3 thereof. Petitioner will have liberty to challenge the punishment order passed in the departmental proceeding. Accordingly, this application is disposed of. Personal appearance of District Education Officer, Purnea is dispensed with. SKM (Mridula Mishra, J.)