IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20243 of 2011 ====================================================== Sudama Roy, son of Sri Deoswarup Roy, resident of Village-Makair, P.O. & P.S.-Makair, District-Saran, Currently posted as Executive Engineer, Flood Control Division, Thakarahan, Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Water Resource Department, Government of Bihar. 2. Principal Secretary, Water Resource Development, Government of Bihar. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resource Development, Government of Bihar. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== For the Petitioners : 1. Mr. Y.B. Giri, Sr. Adv. 2. Mr. Ashish Giri, Adv. 3. Mr. Pranav Kumar, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Anjani Kr Sharan, SC9 ====================================================== 3 23-11-2011 This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 03.11.2011 by which the petitioner has been placed under suspension. Order of suspension in verbatim extracted hereunder. fcgkj ljdkj ty lalk/ku foHkkx vf/klwpuk iVuk] fnukad& 03-11-2011 fo’k;%& fuyacu djus ds laca/k esa (Regarding Suspension) vf/klwpuk la[;k%& 22@fu0fl0¼floku0½&11&21@2011@349@Jh lqnkek jk;] dk;Zikyd vfHk;Urk] ck<+ fu;a=.k ize.My] Bdjkgk] f'kfoj&xksikyxat }kjk lkj.k rVca/k ds 117-05 fd0 eh0 ls 124-25 fd0eh0 ds chp] ik;yV pSuy dk fuekZ.k dk;Z Lohd`r izkDdyu ,oa ,djkjukek esa izko/kkfur dk;Zen ls gVdj jktLFkkuh VªSDVj ls djk;k x;k ,oa bldk Hkqxrku ,djkfjr dk;Zen ds vuq:i Mªsftax e'khu dh nj ls Hkqxrku fd;k x;kA Jh jk; ds mDr dkjZokbZ ds QyLo:i vfu;fer Hkqxrku gqvkA mDr vfu;fer Hkqxrku ds QyLo:i ljdkj ds jktdks’k dh {kfr gqbZA mDr izFke nz’V;k izekf.kr vkjksiksa ds fy, fcgkj ljdkjh lsod ¼oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k ,oa vihy½ fu;ekoyh 2005 ds fu;e&9¼1½ esa fufgr izko/kku ds rgr Jh lqnkek jk;] dk;Zikyd vfHk;Urk] ck<+ fu;a=.k ize.My] Bdjkgk] f'kfoj&xksikyxat dks rRdky izHkko ls fuyafcr fd;k tkrk gSA 2- fuyacu vof/k esa Jh jk;] dk eq[;ky; eq[; vfHk;Urk dk dk;kZy;] ty lalk/ku foHkkx] njHkaxk fu/kkZfjr fd;k tkrk gSA 3- fuyacu vof/k esa Jh jk;] dks vuqekU; thou fuokZg HkRrk ns; gksxkA 4- foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh ls lacaf/kr ladYi vyx ls fuxZr fd;k tk;sxkA fcgkj jkT;iky ds vkns”k ls] g0@& vLi’V ¼Hkjr >k½ ljdkj ds milfpo The power to suspend the Government employee under the Bihar CCA, 2005 Rules is provided under Rule 9(1)(a) which is reproduced herein as under: “9. Order of Suspension- (1) The appointing authority or any authority to which the appointing authority is subordinate or the disciplinary authority or any other authority empowered in that behalf by the Government by general or special order, may place a government servant under suspension when- (a) a disciplinary proceeding against the government servant is contemplated or is pending”. There are two types of suspension order. One suspension order is by way of punishment which is treated to be minor punishment though it is not provided in BCCA Rules which can be passed only after giving show cause notice asking explanation for certain period and another suspension order, which is not punishment, is suspension from service during the contemplated or pending enquiry. I have quoted above the entire suspension order which does not disclose that the suspension order has been passed in a contemplated or pending enquiry. Thus, it is an order by way of punishment which could not be passed without any show cause asking for the explanation of the petitioner. Mr. Anjani Kumar Sharan, S.C. 9, and Mr. Bharat Jha, Deputy Secretary, Water Resource Department, Government of Bihar, could not show from the record that the departmental proceeding is contemplated or pending. They replied on Clause 4 quoted above of the suspension order, which shows that the order relating to departmental proceeding shall be issued later on. It does not mean that the enquiry is contemplated. Mr. Y.B. Giri, learned senior advocate, very clearly explained the meaning of word “Sankalp” which means the reason for initiating the departmental proceeding will not be considered separately. However without going to the submission as above, from the order itself, I am not satisfied that this is an order under Rule 9(1)(a) of the Bihar CCA Rules and, therefore, the order impugned is hereby quashed. It is open for the Government to issue fresh/ appropriate order, after considering the entire facts including the period of posting of the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ application is allowed. Bhardwaj/- (Prakash Chandra Verma, J)