IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12509 of 2007 Dr. Shanker Prasad, son of late Sunder Mal, Permanent resident of Mohalla Casteirs Town, P.O., P.S. & Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand. Present resident of 702(B), Ashiana Plaza, Budh Marg, P.O., P.S. & Dist. Patna. --------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Health, Bihar at Patna. 2. The Director, Department of Health, Bihar at Patna. 3. The Secretary, Department of Finance, Bihar at Patna. 4. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Health, Bihar at Patna. 5. The Accountant General, Bihar at Patna. ----------- Respondents ----------- 3 14.11.2011 Having heard learned counsel for the parties as with regard to the solitary grievance of the petitioner relating to payment of his subsistence allowance with effect from 17.7.1996, this Court would find it difficult to issue a direction to the authorities in view of the fact that as per the respondents’ response in their statement of fact contained in letter no. 1067 dated 14.11.2011, a copy whereof is kept on record of this case, it would transpire that the petitioner, after being placed under suspension by an order dated 17.7.1996, had not remained present in the Headquarter fixed during the period of suspension. In this regard, the respondents have, on the basis of records, found that after the order of suspension was passed on 17.7.1996, he had 2 given his joining in the department only on 16.12.1996 and even thereafter, he had remained absent throughout except on two days, namely, 7.2.1997 and 12.8.1997. If the respondents have to be believed as it is their case that the petitioner had remained absent throughout from 17.7.1996 onwards to 17.1.2008 barring three days i.e. 16.12.1996, 7.2.1997 and 12.8.1997. Payment of subsistence allowance though is a matter of right but, then, it has already been clarified in the Government Circular dated 2.8.1985 issued by the Personnel & Administrative Reforms Department that the employee must remain present in the Headquarter fixed during the period of suspension. In the present case, as noted above, the respondents have taken a clear stand that in a space of more than ten years of suspension, the petitioner had remained present only for the period of three days. Learned counsel for the petitioner however, submits that the petitioner had remained present in the Headquarter fixed under the order of suspension dated 17.7.1996 and that the petitioner can demonstrate this aspect by producing documentary evidence. 3 Taking into account that the aforesaid disputed question of fact, in the first instance, has to be looked into and decided by the competent authority, this Court would direct the petitioner to file his self-contained representation enclosing all his documentary evidence showing his presence in the Headquarter fixed under the order of suspension and if such a representation is filed, the Principal Secretary, Health will take his final decision as with regard to his payment of dues of subsistence allowance for the period the suspension had remained in force i.e. from 17.7.1996 to 17.1.2008. The aforementioned exercise must be completed by the Principal Secretary, Health and payment, if any, admissible to the petitioner must also be made to the petitioner as early as possible but in no event later than six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)