IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17803 of 2008 PREM KUMAR SON OF LATE BABU BHAGWAN PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-PAIGA, P.S.-BHELDI, DISTRICT-SARAN (CHAPRA) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Principal Secretary, Home Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. Inspector General, Prisons, Bihar, Patna. 4. Deputy Secretary, Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. – Respondents. ----------- 3. 04.03.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner questions his order of suspension dated 6.2.2008 issued by the Home (Special) Department. On 6.11.2006 the petitioner while posted as Jail Superintendent was subjected to a surprise raid at his residence when Vigilance P.S. Case No. 73 of 2006 under Sections 7, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act came to be registered against him. He was taken into custody. He was released from custody on 28.11.2007. He joined duty on 30.11.2007. This period causes no difficulty on the issue of suspension in view of Rule 9(2)(c) of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005, hereinafter to be referred to as „the Rules‟. After he joined duty he was suspended by a fresh order dated 6.2.2008 with immediate effect. This was done under Rule 9 (3) of the Rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no 2 charges have been framed much less served on the petitioner within a period of three months from 6.2.2008. Neither was this period of three months extended during its subsistence by any order for the next four months. He, therefore, submits that by virtue of Rule 9(7) of the Rules the suspension stands revoked by operation of law. Rule 9(7) of the Rules is quoted in extenso : “9 (7) – Charge-sheet must be framed within three months from the date of issue of suspension order failing which on expiry of three months, the suspension order shall be revoked unless the authority, which issued the suspension order, passes the order renewing the suspension along with reasons to be recorded in writing for the delay in framing of charge-sheet for a further period of four months : Provided that after the expiry of extended period of four months the suspension order shall stand revoked if the charge-sheet is not framed.” This writ application was filed on 5.12.2008. On 9.2.2009 time was granted for three weeks to file counter affidavit. Today again prayer is made for time. This Court is not inclined to do so in view of the short question of law involved and the specific pleadings of the petitioner in this regard. The charges against the petitioner are serious. But the intention of the legislature framed in Rule 9(7) of the Rules has to be given effect to by the Court. The Court has little option in the 3 matter. This Court, therefore, holds that in absence of charges being framed within three months or the period for the same being extended during the subsistence thereof by another four months, the order of suspension stands revoked by operation of law. This Court formally pronounces so. The writ application is allowed. The departmental proceedings against the petitioner shall continue. This Court does consider it proper to direct that it shall be a matter of enquiry and appropriate action against the person concerned by the Principal Secretary of the Department of Home, Government of Bihar as to under what circumstances no counter affidavit came to be filed on behalf of the State, despite adjournment leading the writ application to be allowed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)