IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5619 of 2010 KRISHNA PRASAD VERMA S/O SRI ARJUN PRASAD VERMA R/O VILL.- TITAI BIGHA, P.S.- MUFFASSIL, DISTT.- AURANGABAD. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES, BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GAYA 5. THE CIVIL SURGEON-CUM-CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, AURANGABAD 6. THE IN CHARGE MEDICAL OFFICER PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, DEV, AURANGABAD. ----------- 03 13.09.2010 The petitioner challenges the order of suspension, as communicated to him under Memo No.2819 dated 26.10.2007, being the order of the Chief Medical Officer-cum-Civil Surgeon, Aurangabad. Petitioner states that he had been suspended on grounds of alleged embezzlement for which a criminal case was also filed. In the disciplinary proceedings, an Inquiry Officer was appointed but beyond that nothing has proceeded in the departmental proceedings not even charges have been framed though almost three years have gone up. In regard to the criminal case, it is stated that upon investigation final form was submitted on 31.03.2008 in which upon conclusion of investigation petitioner has not been charge-sheeted because of lack of evidence. Petitioner submits that in terms of Rule-9(7) of the - 2 - Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005, no charges having been framed for more than three months, the suspension would automatically lapse. This Court had adjourned the matter on 01.09.2010 in order to enable the learned counsel for the State to seek instructions. Learned counsel for the State fairly states that apart from sending letter and reminder for instructions the learned State counsel has a telephonic talk with Civil Surgeon, Aurangabad on 01.09.2010 and the Civil Surgeon was totally unaware of any such matter still the State counsel waited for instruction but none has come. Having considered the matter and the facts aforesaid, I have no option but to quash the suspension of petitioner with all consequential benefits in view of Rule-9 (7) of the Rules aforesaid The writ application is, thus, allowed in the terms aforesaid. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)