🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Chandan Kumar and Others Vs The State of Bihar and Others

Case No: CWJC No. 12088 of 2004

Date of Decision: Nov. 28, 2005

Citation: (2007) 1 PLJR 290

Hon'ble Judges: Barin Ghosh, J

Bench: Single Bench

Advocate: Ajit Kumar Singh No. 2, for the Appellant; Ambika Bhagat, Kamal Kr. Sinha and Mr. Satyabir Bharti For the State, for the Respondent

Final Decision: Allowed

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER

Barin Ghosh, J.@mdashIt is surprising that the Executive Officer-cum-Special Officer, Munger Nagar Parishad, Munger has the audacity to call

the order passed by the Chairman of the Nagar Parishad revoking the order of suspension of the petitioners as an illegal order. The State

Government is directed to initiate appropriate proceedings against the said Executive Officer for the said action on his part. If necessary, the State

Government is directed to obtain certified xerox copy of the counter affidavit affirmed by him and filed in this Court in this case.

2. Paragraphs 10 & 11 of that counter affidavit will show that he does not have respect towards his superiors.

3. It appears that the petitioners were suspended at one point of time. The said order of suspension has been revoked. None of them has yet been

dismissed from service or discharged therefrom. Neither during the period of suspension any subsistence allowance had been paid to the

petitioners, nor after revocation of the order of suspension, one paise has been paid to the petitioners on account of their salaries. The officers of

the Nagar Parishad are getting their salaries. The Superintendent of Nagar Parishad is being paid his salaries. Other persons connected with the

Executive Officer-cum-Special Officer are also being paid their salaries.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the Nagar Parishad submitted that the Nagar Parishad is facing financial stringency, and accordingly, has not

been able to pay the subsistence allowance or salaries. Not one single statement has been made to that effect in the counter affidavit.

5. I, therefore, ignore such submission. Submission without a plea in regard thereto cannot be considered at all. In such view of the matter, the writ

petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to ensure payment of subsistence allowance to the petitioners for the period they remain

suspended, salaries for the period after revocation of the suspension and also the arrears of salary, if any, since October, 2002 until the suspension

within a period of one month from the date of service of a copy of this order upon the Respondent No. 4, i.e. Executive Officercum-Special

Officer, Munger Nagar Parishad, Munger.