IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.11094 of 2010
1. PHULESHWAR PRASAD MANDAL S/O LATE HARI MANDAL R/O VILL MUSKIPUR,
P.O.JAMALPUR GOGARI, P.S.GOGARI, DISTT-KHAGARIA
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR
, PATNA
2. THE SECRETARY, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT VISHWASHARIYA
BHAWAN, PATNA
3. BRAJESH MEHROTRA, SECRETARY, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT
VISHWASHARIYA BHAWAN, PATNA
4. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT
VISHWASHARIYA BHAWAN, PATNA
5. HRIDAYA NARAIN JHA, SPECIAL SECRETARY, BUILIDNG CONSTRUCTION
DEPARTMENT VISHWASHARAIYA BHAWAN, PATNA
6. THE UNDER SECRETARY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT PATNA
7. GHANSHYAM RAM, UNDER SECRETARY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT
PATNA
8. THE RESIDENT COMMISSIONER GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, BIHAR BHAWAN, 5
KAUTILYA MARG, NEW DELHI
-----------
2. 10.08.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Counsel for the State.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated
29.6.2010 transferring him to Gardanibagh.
It is submitted that the petitioner was posted at Bihar
Bhawan, New Delhi when he came to be suspended by an
order dated 15.2.2010 and his headquarters during suspension
period was designated as the office of Superintending
Engineer, Building Circle, Patna. The petitioner questioned the
same in CWJC No. 5739 of 2010. On 19.4.2010 this Court
stayed the operation of the order of suspension. The writ
petition is stated to be still pending.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner is correct in his
submission that if the order of suspension has been stayed the
order fixing the headquarter at Patna during period of
suspension automatically also vanishes. The petitioner is first
required to be permitted to join at Bihar Bhawan, New Delhi
and thereafter the matter may proceed afresh in accordance
with law.
This Court finds that the impugned order dated
29.6.2010 proceeds on a completely wrong premise when in
column 4 it describes him as a person relieved from
suspension. This Court has already held that the petitioner
stands reinstated in his service at Bihar Bhawan, New Delhi
and column 4 should have made a correct recitals of his
present status and in absence of which the present impugned
order is not sustainable.
The order dated 29.6.2010 is quashed in so far as the
petitioner alone is concerned, without prejudice to the rights of
the respondents.
The writ application stands allowed.
Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)