IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9468 of 2010 1. YOGENDRA KUMAR S/O LATE SHALIGRAM SINGH THE BRANCH MANAGER, PATLIPUTRA CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., DANAPUR BRANCH, AT PRESENTLY RESIDING AT PANCHSHEEL NAGAR, P.S.- DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY CO- OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. PATLIPUTRA CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK, S.P. VERMA ROAD, PATNA THROUGH THE MANAGING DIRECTOR 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, PATLIPUTRA CENTRAL CO- OPERATIVE BANK LTD. MADANDHARI BHAWAN, S.P. VERMA ROAD, PATNA ----------- For the Petitioner :M/s Kalyan Shankar & Manoj Kumar, Advocates For the Bank :Mr. Purushottam Jha, Advocate 02/ 24.06.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the suspension order dated 22.12.2009, Annexure-5, as according to him the suspension order was issued ignoring his plea for time contained in letter dated 19.12.2009, Annexure-4 submitted in response to the show cause notice dated 1.12.2009, Annexure-3. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that had the Bank authorities given him one week time in response to his request contained in letter dated 19.12.2009, Annexure-4, he would have explained the situation and the suspension order may not have been passed at all. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that even now if he is given opportunity to explain the situation then he will satisfy the authorities that suspension order is fit to be recalled. 4. Let the petitioner represent before the Managing Director of the Bank highlighting the submission, which was 2 raised during the hearing of this petition that there is no reason for placing the petitioner under suspension as the allegation that there has been defalcation of Rs. 1,03,95,191.72 is wholly misconceived and in fact no amount of the Bank has been defalcated as also the additional amount which was kept in the safe of the Bank was on account of paucity of staff. 5. Let the representation of the petitioner filed in compliance of this order be considered by the Managing Director of the Bank, who has placed the petitioner under suspension and if petitioner is not responsible for any defalcation and technical non-compliance is found against him then the authorities should consider his case sympathetically for recall of the suspension order in view of the fact that there is paucity of staff in the Bank. Aforesaid representation be disposed of as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of its receipt along with a copy of this order. 6. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V.N. Sinha, J.)