SHEO PRASAD Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the year 1967 the petitioner was working as Book-Binder in the Secretariat Press at Gulzarbagh. On 29-6-1967 an information was lodged at Alamganj Police Station to the effect that the petitioner as also one Lalchand Bhagat was caught while taking away monocast metal ingots of the Secretariat Press. A criminal case under Sections 380 and 411 of the Penal Code was instituted against the petitioner. After investigation the police submitted charge sheet. During the pendency of the criminal case the petitioner was put under suspension by order dated 13-7-1967, copy of which is Annexure 1, to the writ application, with effect from 30-6-1967. The criminal trial remained pending for about three years. The petitioner was acquitted by the Munsif-Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna City, by his judgment and order dated 2-3-1970. The relevant portion of the said judgment, as quoted in Paragraph 9 of the petition, reads as follows:

(2.) The petitioner soon after his acquittal in the criminal case wrote a letter to the Superintendent, Secretariat Press, Gulzarbagh, respondent 3, who is his appointing authority, for allowing him to join his duties with effect from the 26th March, 1970; a copy of this letter is Annexure 2 The Superintendent did not allow the petitioner to join his duties. On 29-4-1970 he made representation to the Secretary, Finance Department, through respondent 3 to allow to him to resume his duties. A copy of this representation is Annexure 3. He personally met the Deputy Secretary and the Secretary, Finance Department, and requested them to look into his grievance. The petitioner did not get any relief from any authority and he filed another representation dated 26-11-1970 (Annexure 4). Still he did not get any relief, in the matter of his release from suspension. He, therefore, hied this writ application in this Court on 21-12-1970.

(3.) During the pendency of this writ application an order was made on 10-2-1971, a copy of which is Annexure 5 to the supplementary affidavit releasing the petitioner from suspension. By order dated 6-5-1971 (Annexure 6) it has been decided that the petitioner will be deemed to have been released from his suspension from 2-3-1970 and will be deemed to have been reinstated in his post from that date. By the supplementary affidavit the petitioner attacks the order contained in Annexure 6 on the ground that if for the period of his suspension he is not paid his full allowance after deducting the subsistence allowance which had been paid to him then the effect of such order would be that the order of suspension was as a measure of punishment without complying with the principles of natural justice. It may be stated here that no departmental proceeding was ever started against the petitioner for the alleged act of his theft.