- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4793 of 2010 MITHILESH PATHAK, Son of Late Kamla Dutta Pathak, resident of village- Sonehathu, P.S.-Haspura, District-Aurangabad. ………..Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, Primary Education, Vikash Bhawan, Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad. 4. The District Education Establishment Committee, Aurangabad through its Chairman i.e. Deputy Development Commissioner, Aurangabad. 5. The Deputy Development Commissioner, District-Aurangabad. 6. The District Superintendent of Education, District-Aurangabad. …………Respondents. ----------- 2/ 15.04.2010 I.A. No. 3009 of 2010. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner has been put under suspension by the order contained in Memo No. 1472 dated 23.07.2007 issued by the District Superintendent of Education. The suspension order has been issued against the petitioner simply because the petitioner fail to submit his explanation within two days from the date of issuance of the order by the District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad, asking some explanation from the petitioner. Annexuere-1 is the order, contained in Memo No. 305 dated 06.07.2007, whereby the D.S.E. has directed the petitioner to submit his explanation within two days, in case the explanation is not submitted within this period, it will be deemed that he has nothing to say in his defence. Immediately, thereafter, the impugned order of suspension was issued. - 2 - The counsel for the petitioner submits that suspension order has not been issued in contemplation of the departmental proceeding as till date no order has been passed regarding initiation of the departmental proceeding. The counsel appearing for State has also admitted this fact that till date, departmental proceeding has not been initiated. Keeping the government employee under suspension for no specific reason, is neither in the interest of the employee nor in the interest of the institution, where such employee is working. Petitioner was working as In-charge Head Master, on account of suspension order, remained deprived for two years from discharging duties connected to his post. Such order should not continue, being illegal and arbitrary. Accordingly, the order dated 23.07.2007 contained in Memo No. 1472 (Annexure-3), is quashed. The District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad, is directed to issue the order revoking suspension of the petitioner. Petitioner will be allowed to join on his post and entire arrears of salary, for the period of suspension, shall be paid to him, without any delay. Sanjeet/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)