IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13074 of 2009 ARBIND KUMAR SINHA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 02. 09.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner questions his order of suspension dated 09.09.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits from Annexure-5 that he never was on casual leave on 9th of September, 2009 but had proceed on official work to Patna to deliver documents in the Office of the Chief Engineer. Thereafter he had to suddenly proceed on earned leave for unavoidable reasons of illness of his wife. Learned counsel for the State submits that even earned leave was not a matter of right but required sanction. Circumstances may compel the government servant to proceed on leave after intimation. If he later furnishes explanation for the urgency, the authorities are bound to consider whether the explanation is acceptable or not. Further administrative action would depend upon such decision. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner shall file a representation before the authority explaining the urgency of circumstances in which he had to 2 proceed on earned leave after intimation. If the petitioner furnishes such representation/his explanation, this Court requires the Respondents to reconsider the suspension based on their satisfaction of the explanation that may be furnished by the petitioner. Let it be so done within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order with such representation before the concerned Respondents. The writ application stands disposed off. Shageer (Navin Sinha, J)