D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) THE appellant has assailed the order dated 30.1.2008 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 6441 of 2007, whereby the appellant's prayer for quashing the Officer Order of his suspension as contained in Memo No. 6751(S) dated 26.10.2007, issued under the signature of the respondent No. 3, was rejected.
(2.) IN his writ petition, the petitioner/appellant had challenged the impugned Office Order on the following grounds: 1. that the impugned order of suspension is totally arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and in colourable exercise of power. 2. that the impugned order of suspension is violative of Rule 3 -A(l)(a) of Bihar and Orissa Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1935 in as much as there was no departmental proceeding pending against the petitioner on the date when the order of suspension was issued and neither was any charge framed or served against him, even after lapse of more than one month from the date of suspension. 3. that the respondent No. 3 under whose signature the order was issued, had no jurisdiction to put the petitioner under suspension, since such order could have been passed only by the appointing authority namely the Engineer -in -Chief. Facts of the case, as pleaded by the petitioner in the writ petition, are that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer in the Public Works Department known as Road Construction Department on 4.2.1980 and since then, he has maintained unblemished service record. On his transfer as Junior Engineer, National Highway -Swarnrekha Section, under Chandil Subdivision Jamshedpur, he joined the post on 21.7.2005. During his posting in the National Highway Road Division, Jamshedpur, he was served with the impugned order of suspension on the ground of alleged dereliction and negligence in duty and the alleged violation of Rule 3 -A(l)(a) of the Bihar and Orissa Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1935, with immediate effect.
(3.) AFTER hearing the petitioner and the respondents, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ application vide order dated 30.1.2008 on the ground that the petitioner has not made any case for interfering with the impugned order of suspension.;