AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Writ application of the present appellant was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 12.09.2014 refusing to interfere with the order of punishment of
stoppage of four annual increment with cumulative effect as well as a direction for non- payment of salary etc. for the period of suspension except the
subsistence allowance.
Submission of the counsel representing the appellant is that so far as the second punishment of stoppage of salary for the period of suspension is
concerned, since no separate proceeding or opportunity was given to the appellant, therefore, the said decision becomes vulnerable and is in the teeth
of a Division Bench decision rendered in the case of Dinesh Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2006 (4) P.L.J.R. 514. The Division Bench
held that for imposing punishment of withholding of salary for the period of suspension, a proceeding under Rule 97 (3) of the Bihar Service Code is
warranted. If it is not done then it would amount to violations of principles of natural justice. Similar view has been taken even recently in the case of
Md. Hanif Khan Vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2011 (2) P.L.J.R. 599.
In view of the above and in absence of any rebuttal whether procedure under Rule 97 (3) of the Bihar Service Code has been adopted, the
punishment of withholding of salary for the period of suspension is hereby quashed. L.P.A. is allowed limited to the extent indicated above.
The respondents are now directed to take steps for payment of salary for the period of suspension preferably within a period of three months from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
