IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10574 of 2011 Anand Kumar Jha, son of late Tula Nand Jha, resident of village – Narayanpatii, Police Station – Raj Nagar, District - Madhubani Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Madhubani. 5. The District Development Commissioner, Madhubani. 6. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Madhubani. 7. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Babubarhi, District – Madhubani. 8. The Circle Officer, Babubarhi, District – Madhubani. ----------- 03. 18.8.2011 Petitioner is a Panchayat Sachiv. He was ordered to be suspended vide Annexure-4 dated 13.7.2009. Perusal of the order would indicate that such a decision came to be taken in the background that the petitioner was absenting himself from duty as he was in judicial custody in Madhubani Town P S Case No.115 of 2009 registered under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. Since then petitioner was released on bail by the High Court and he reported back to duty, his joining has not been taken nor the order of suspension revoked. Counsel for the petitioner submits that such act of the respondents falls foul of law which has been declared by a Full Bench of this Court while interpreting the provisions of Rule-9 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005. Attention of the Court is drawn to the decision and the finding given in this regard in 2 para-16. Taking the ratio of the decision it goes without saying that petitioner is entitled to claim revocation of his suspension forthwith after his release. This may not prevent the respondents from passing a fresh order of suspension if they so feel but the earlier suspension order contained in Annexure-4 to that extent cannot subsist. In light of the Full Bench decision, Anneuxre-4 stands quashed. Respondents are directed to take the joining of the petitioner. However, it is left open to the wisdom of the disciplinary authority to decide the future status of the petitioner on this count taking into consideration the pendency of the criminal case or its fate. Writ is allowed. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)