IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13874 of 2009 1. BHUPAL DAS @ BHOPAL DAS S/O LATE KRISHNA MOHAN DAS VILL- BHIMDAS TOLA TINTANGA DIYARA, P.S- RANGRA, DISTT- BHAGALPUR …….. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BHAGALPUR 3. PANCHYAT OFFICER BHAGALPUR 4. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SAHKUND BLOCK, SAHKUND ………………………………………………. Respondents ----------- 2. 03.11.2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner was taken into custody in a criminal case when he was suspended by an order dated 21.7.2009. He has subsequently been released on bail. The submission is that there is no justification to continue him under suspension without framing charges also. The issue has been subject matter of consideration by the Full Bench in the case of The State of Bihar & ors Vrs Gyan Kumar Ram reported in 2009 (4) PLJR 272. Para 20(a) holds as follows:- “20(a) The time frame contemplated in rule 9(7) is applicable only when an order of suspension is passed in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding. On the other hand, if order of suspension is passed by taking into account the other eventualities contemplated in rule 9, the time frame is not applicable and the order of suspension continues until it is revoked or deemed to be revoked under any of the provisions”. The suspension of the petitioner is not in contemplation of a departmental proceeding and therefore there is no time limit applicable under Rule 9(7). To that extent there is no merit in this writ application. However, this Court expects that once the petitioner has been suspended the authorities shall proceed with the departmental proceedings in accordance with law expeditiously. This writ application is disposed with the aforesaid observations. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)