IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18180 of 2008 GAYAN KUMAR RAM Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3. 11.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Despite grant of adjournment on 27.1.2009 indicating that writ application shall be disposed on the next date considering the short nature of controversy, no counter affidavit has been filed. In view of the nature of the order to be passed, this Court does not consider it necessary to await the same further. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of suspension dated 27.10.2008. His claim that he was not absent unauthorizedly and that he suffered injury during the flood relief work and intimated the authority also, are issues which need not engage the attention of the Court at this stage. Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to Rule 9 of the Bihar Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 submits that under sub-rule (7) charge sheet had to be framed within three months from the date of suspension, failing which on expiry of the same, the suspension shall be revoked unless within this period of three months appropriate orders had been passed renewing the suspension for another maximum period of four months. Learned counsel for the petitioner invites attention of the Court to the pleadings in 2 paragraph 16 to submit that no departmental proceedings had been initiated against the petitioner till date. The Respondents having chosen not to controvert the specific submission that no charge had been framed within the period of three months or that the period had been extended by another four months during the earlier period of three months, the suspension of the petitioner stood revoked under Rule 9(7) on expiry of the first period of three months i.e. 27.10.2008 by operation of law. This Court only makes formal pronouncement on the same. The suspension order dated 27.10.2008 has, therefore, ceased to exist. The writ application stands allowed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)