Dr. Prabhat Kumar Yadav vs The State of Bihar

Mr. Jyoti Saran, J. (Oral) - Heard Mr. Siya Ram Shahi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. None appears on behalf of the State.

This matter was heard on 28.10.2016 when time was granted to the counsel for the State as well as the University to seek instruction and file counter affidavit but when the matter is taken up today neither there is any counter affidavit nor there is any representation on behalf of the respondents. The matter is thus taken up for consideration on merits.

Mr. Shahi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner with reference to the suspension order bearing Memo No.712 dated 31.05.2016 impugned at Annexure-7 makes a very brief submission. He submits that the suspension order is not in accordance with rule 9 of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the ''Rules'') inasmuch as on a mere allegation of indiscipline that the order of suspension has been passed without any stipulation regarding pending disciplinary proceeding or a disciplinary proceeding contemplated.

The submission made by Mr. Shahi is confirmed from the order of suspension inasmuch as neither does the order impugned mentions any contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding nor is it passed in a pending proceeding or whether any criminal case is instituted or there is a security threat. An order of suspension under rule 9 of ''the Rules'' is not a routine exercise rather there are pre-requisite provided under rule 9 of ''the Rules'' for such exercise. In so far as the case in hand is concerned, the order of suspension does not make any reference to any of the circumstances mentioned in rule 9 of ''the Rules'' for its support.

In the circumstances discussed above, the order of suspension bearing Memo No.712 dated 31.5.2016 impugned at Annexure-7 is unsustainable and is accordingly quashed and set aside.

The writ petition is allowed. . .