IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4657 of 2002 MAHESH PRASAD SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5. 09.01.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 4.9.1999 imposing minor punishment of stoppage of one increment with immediate effect and that nothing beyond subsistence allowance was payable for the period of suspension. A charge sheet was served on him on 22.5.1999. The charges were of unauthorized absence on 6.1.1999 and 3.12.1998. The petitioner gave his show cause. The authority while considering the same by their order dated 8.6.1999 found that his application for leave had subsequently been sanctioned for the period 2.11.1998 to 10.12.1998. That takes care of the allegation of absence on 3.12.1998. For the absence on 6.1.1999 the petitioner in his defence submitted a medical certificate from a Doctor of his illness. The impugned order does not disbelieve the illness or the genuineness of the certificate but that the petitioner should have immediately informed the aforesaid on his joining on 8.1.1999. Learned counsel for the State contended that the petitioner did not join on 8.1.1999. This Court finds it difficult to entertain the said objection, which does not form part of the charge. 2 From the discussions contained in the order dated 8.6.1999 the allegation of unauthorized absence on 3.12.1998 stands negated. Likewise, once the Respondent has accepted his plea of illness and has admitted the medical certificate in support thereof for 6.1.1999 that negates completely the charge of unauthorized absence. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 4.9.1999 is not sustainable. It is, accordingly, set aside. The petitioner is held entitled to withheld increments as also the entire salary for the period of suspension. The writ application stands allowed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)