IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6638 of 2009 INDRADEO YADAV . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . 6 11.52010 Reg:- I.A. No.2629 of 2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner, State and the Intervener- respondent. The District Superintendent of Education, Goaplganj is present in Court with the counter affidavit from which it transpires that the petitioner was suspended vide letter no.886 dated 6.6.2009 and subsequently the departmental proceeding has been initiated, memo of charges have been framed vide memo no. 2286 dated 8.12.2009, asking the petitioner to submit his show cause. It has been stated that till date no show cause has been filed in compliance of the memo of charges. It has also been stated that there are some complaints against the petitioner regarding the account of the school being operated by the school teachers, other than the members of the Committee. Without going into all these facts, considering that the charges are framed and the departmental proceeding was initiated within a period of six months from the date of the issuance of suspension order, as per rule 9 clause 7 of Bihar - 2 - Govt. Servant (Classification and Control Appeal) Rules, the suspension order is liable to be revoked. There is no whisper in the counter affidavit that on expiry of three months’ period, any order was passed for extension of the period of suspension showing specific reason for not framing charge within three months’ period. The suspension order dated 6.6.2009 is quashed. However, departmental proceeding has already been initiated, charges framed and served to the petitioners, as such petitioner will participate in the departmental proceeding. Respondents are directed to complete the departmental proceeding as soon as possible, preferably within a period of nine months. The writ application stands disposed off. Personal appearance of District Superintendent of Education, Gopalganj is dispensed with. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar.