IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16957 of 2008 RAKESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 7/ 27/10/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. In view of the allegations of personal mala fide made against respondent No.4 notice had been issued to him. Despite the same he has chosen not to enter appearance. This Court, therefore, proceeds on the principle of non traverse insofar as he is concerned. The petitioner was placed under suspension by an order dated 30.9.2008. The allegations were of misbehaviour with respondent No.4, unbecoming of a government servant. The petitioner prior to his suspension, on 14.9.2008 vide Annexure-8 series, had already reported to his superiors of the unbecoming conduct of respondent No.4 seeking to pressurize the petitioner in respect of his discharge of official duties, holding out threats. His complaint was forwarded by the District Magistrate to the Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj for appropriate enquiry on 14.9.2008 vide Annexure-9. Charges have been framed against the petitioner on 24.11.2008 to which he has filed his reply also. This Court on 19.3.2009, while directing filing of a 2 counter affidavit by respondents-1 to 3 and 5, had specifically directed the respondents to deal with Annexures-8 and 9 in their counter affidavit. A common counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents 2 and 3 alone. No counter affidavit has been filed by the Superintendent of Police, respondent No.5. The counter affidavit is elusive and simply reiterates that the matter had been forwarded to the Superintendent of Police. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the assertions of the petitioner in his representation prior to the suspension order with regard to the very same occurrence on which the order of suspension is based, the refusal of respondent No.4 to answer the allegations levelled against him, the Superintendent of Police choosing to maintain a studied silence, this Court in the entirety is satisfied that there is no justification for continuance of the impugned order of suspension dated 30.9.2008. The same is accordingly set aside. The writ application stands allowed. This shall be without prejudice to the rights of the respondents to proceed with the departmental proceedings in accordance with law. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)