Patna High Court - Orders
Awadhesh Prasad Sharma vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 19 April, 2012
Author: Navin Sinha
Bench: Navin Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5937 of 2012
======================================================
1. Awadhesh Prasad Sharma Son Of Late Chamari Singh
Resident Of Vill.-Parsawan, P.S. Pandarak, Dist.-Patna
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Department Of
Social Welfare, Bihar Patna
2. The Secretary Department Of Social Welfare Bihar, Patna
3. The Director Social Security Bihar, Patna. Shram Bhawan
Bailey Road, Patna-1
4. The Deputy Secretary, Social Welfare Department Bihar,
Patna
5. The Under Secretary Personal Claim Settlement Cell,
Department Of Finance Bihar, Patna
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2. 19-04-2012Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
The relief sought in this application is for payment of the withheld increments and full salary for the period of suspension in pursuance of a departmental proceeding. Earlier punishment was imposed on 24.3.2001, censure to be entered in his character roll, stoppage of two increments and that nothing beyond subsistence allowance was payable for the period of suspension. The order of punishment was set aside in C.W.J.C. No. 6011 of 2001 for procedural reasons. The matter was remanded. Fresh orders of punishment have been passed on 5.1.2009 2 Patna High Court CWJC No.5937 of 2012 (2) dt.19-04-2012 2/3 imposing censure only.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is now entitled to the increments withheld and also full salary for the period of suspension as both did not figure in the fresh impugned order.
The Court upholds the submission in so far as the increments withheld by the order dated 24.3.2001 is concerned. The payment of full salary for the period of suspension under Rule 11(3) of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 is dependent on whether the suspension was wholly unjustified. If on reconsideration no punishment may have followed, the petitioner was correct. But if after reconsideration also, punishment has been maintained it cannot be said that the suspension was wholly unjustified. Merely because the order may not expressly state so, cannot persuade the Court to hold that notwithstanding the suspension culminating in an order of punishment after a departmental proceeding, he was still entitled to full salary for the period of suspension on the ground of the suspension being unjustified. That may be vitiating the departmental proceeding itself.
The writ application is allowed in part only with regard to payment of withheld increments, to be complied with within a maximum period of two months 3 Patna High Court CWJC No.5937 of 2012 (2) dt.19-04-2012 3/3 from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
The writ application stands disposed.
P. Kumar/- (Navin Sinha, J)