Allowed

Srinivas Chandra Tiwary v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC12 Oct 2017CWJC/5978/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court examined a suspension order issued against a petitioner by the Director Administration. The court held that the issuing officer lacked jurisdiction under the applicable service rules to place the petitioner under suspension.

What did the court decide?

The suspension order (Memo No. 1056), the related memos of charge, and orders issued by the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, were set aside.

Srinivas Chandra Tiwary Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5978 of 2017

¶3

===========================================================

¶4

Srinivas Chandra Tiwary Son of Sri Bharat Prasad Tiwary, resident of E2/8 of Sadhnapuri, P.S.-Gardanibagh, District-Patna .... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna

¶8

The Director, (Administration)-Cum-Additional Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna .... Respondents

¶9

=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Vinod Kumar Kanth, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Prabhu Nath Pathak, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Madanjeet Singh, GP XX

¶10

===========================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 12-10-2017

¶12

Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Kant, learned senior counsel

¶13

appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Madanjeet Kumar Singh, GP XX, appearing for the State.

¶14

With the consent of both the parties, this writ petition is disposed off at the stage of admission, itself.

¶15

The petitioner, the then Secretary, Bihar School Education Board and presently the Assistant Director, Mid Day Meal, has been put under suspension vide order, dated 26.12.2016, as contained in Memo No. 1056, by the Director Administration-cum-Additional Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar.

¶16

Mr. Vinod Kumar Kanth, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that in view of Section 9 of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rule, 2005, (hereinafter referred to for the sake of gravity as, “CCA Rules, 2005), says that the appointment authority or any authority to which the appointing authority is subordinate or the disciplinary authority or any

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.5978 of 2017 dt.12-10-2017

¶18

¶19

other authority empowered in that behalf by the Government by general or special order, may place a government servant under suspension. Secondly, the disciplinary authority or any other authority empowered by general or special order may put a person under suspension contemplating a departmental proceeding, but, the Director neither the appointing authority nor the superior to the appointing authority nor the disciplinary authority of the petitioner has put the petitioner under suspension and, therefore, the order of suspension was issued by an officer not competent under the Rule 9 of the CCA Rules, 2005, and same is illegal.

¶20

The State of Bihar has filed counter affidavit, but, vide order, dated 07.09.2017, the State of Bihar was directed to file specific reply to the question whether the Director Administration is competent authority to place the petitioner under suspension, but, no specific reply is given in the entire counter affidavit.

¶21

Mr. Madanjeet Kumar Singh, learned Government Pleader XX, has very fairly submitted that the Director Administration is not competent authority as he is neither the appointing authority nor the disciplinary authority of the petitioner.

¶22

Having considered the facts and the submissions of both the sides, I find that the Director Administration-cum-Additional Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, is not the competent authority to put the petitioner under suspension and the order is, thus, without jurisdiction. By supplementary affidavit the memo of charge is also served on the petitioner by the Secretary, the Bihar School Examination Board, who is also not competent under the Rules as

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.5978 of 2017 dt.12-10-2017

¶24

¶25

he is neither a disciplinary authority nor the appointing authority of the petitioner.

¶26

Accordingly, Annexure 1 (Memo No. 1056, dated 26.12.2016), issued by the Director Administration-cum-Additional Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, and the orders, as contained in Annexure 6 (A) and (B), issued by the Secretary, the Bihar School Examination Board, are set aside and the writ petition is allowed .

¶27

The disciplinary authority, if so desires, may proceed further in accordance with law.

¶28

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶29

SA/-

¶30

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N/A
UploadingDate	30.10.2017
Transmission Date	N/A

Srinivas Chandra Tiwary v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srinivas Chandra Tiwary v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chhanguri Mahaldar Vs The State Of Bihar

Krishna Bind Vs The State Of Bihar

Meena Kumari @ Meena Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rajeshwar Prasad Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shiv Shankar Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ravi Bhushan Prasad Sinha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.