Nilima Sinha vs The State of Bihar and Others

Honourable R.M. Doshit, Chief Justice

Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 18th November 2010 made by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C No. 7654 of 2010, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters patent.

The appellant, a Child Development Project Officer, Tollothu, District Rohtas, approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in CWJC No. 7654 of 2010 to challenge the order of her suspension from service, Pending the disciplinary proceeding, made under Notification dated 21st April 2010 issued by the State Government. It was alleged that the appellant did not stay at the Headquarter and that she was demanding illegal gratification and was misbehaving with the subordinate staff.

According to the appellant, the impugned order of suspension was made against her consequent to her filing a complaint on 19th December 2009 in respect of several irregularities/illegalities committed under the Child Development Project in respect of the recruitment of Anganwari Sevikas. The learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition subject to the direction that the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the appellant be completed within six months from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of the order. In case, the proceedings are not completed within the specified period, the disciplinary authority shall reconsider the continuance of the appellant under suspension.

True to its reputation, the State Government has failed to comply with the direction to complete the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the appellant.

Learned Advocate Mr. Keshav Kumar Sinha has appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that the order of suspension has been vitiated by malafide. He has submitted that obviously the order of suspension has been made as a counter action to the appellant''s making complaint about financial irregularities committed in respect of several Anganwari Centres. He has submitted that the allegations made by the appellant in respect of financial irregularities have been proved to be true. He has submitted that the order of suspension, therefore, deserves to be set aside.

Learned Advocate Mr Roy Shivaji Nath has appeared for the respondents. He has submitted that the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the appellant has been completed. The enquiry officer has submitted the report. Pursuant to the finding of guilt recorded against the appellant, the respondent-State Government has proposed to dismiss the appellant from service. The proposal is pending before the Bihar Public Service Commission for approval.

Without entering into the allegations of malafide made against the respondents, as the disciplinary proceeding has now been completed and the matter is pending before the Bihar Public Service Commission for approval for nearly two months; in our opinion, the ends of justice shall be met if the respondents are directed to revoke the order of suspension and to reinstate the appellant in service in the event no order is made in respect of the disciplinary proceeding within 15 days from today.

In the above circumstance, we direct that in the event the proposal made by the State Government is not approved by the Bihar Public Service Commission or the final order is not made by the State Government by 31st March 2012, the order of suspension made against the appellant on 21st April 2010 shall stand revoked. The appellant will stand reinstated in service from 1st April 2012.The appellant will be entitled to receive admissible pay and allowances effective from 1st April 2012.

Subject to the above direction, the Appeal and the Interlocutory Application are disposed of.

It is clarified that we have not examined the merits of the allegation of malafide made by the appellant. In the event order of punishment is made against the appellant, the appellant will be entitled to challenge such order before the appropriate forum on available grounds including the grounds raised in the present proceeding.