IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 16163 of 2010 Benkatesh Kumar, son of late Girijesh Sharma, resident of village – Mahesh Parasi, P S – Uphara, District – Aurangabad - Petitioner Versus 1 The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2 Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3 Regional Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Division, Gaya 4 District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad 5 Block Development Officer, Goh, district – Aurangabad 6 Block Education Extension Officer, Goh, district – Aurangabad 7 Block Education Extension Officer, Dev, Aurangabad- Respondents ----------- 3 09.11.2010 Petitioner is an Assistant Teacher and is aggrieved by order, as contained in Memo No 873 dated 22.04.2010, passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad. By the said communication (Annexure-16), a departmental proceeding has been initiated against him and he has been suspended. The grievance of the petitioner is that though his suspension was ordered on 22.04.2010, he has not been either paid his subsistence allowance nor any chargesheet has been framed and served on him and inspite of that, the suspension continues which in contravention to Rule 9 (7) of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005. Noticing the controversy, by order dated 25.10.2010, this Court has adjourned the matter for filing a comprehensive counter affidavit in the matter by the State. A counter affidavit has been filed today in which everything has been said except that whether chargesheet has been submitted or not nor has anything been said about payment of subsistence allowance. State chose not to answer the two questions, as noticed by this Court in the earlier order. I am left with no option but to 2 draw an adverse inference in this regard. Thus, the position is that petitioner has continued to be suspended beyond three months without any chargesheet being submitted. The consequence is provided in Rule 9 (7) of the Rules aforesaid. I, accordingly, have no option but to quash that part of the impugned order by which suspension has been ordered. It would be deemed that suspension is revoked with immediate effect. I further direct that within one month from today, the subsistence allowance, for the period of suspension, has to be paid to the petitioner, the responsibility whereof would be on the District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad. With this observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)