Patna High Court
Shishir Kumar MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- BIBEK CHAUDHURI
Holding
The suspension order was invalid and must be withdrawn, but the departmental proceeding may continue.
Summary
The petitioner, an Additional Collector of Madhepura, was suspended on 16 January 2025 based on a viral video alleging he assaulted a badminton opponent. He filed a writ petition seeking quash of the notification initiating departmental proceedings under the Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005, the suspension order, and the three‑man committee report. The State argued that the departmental proceeding was validly initiated by a competent authority and that any evidentiary objections could be raised later. The Court agreed that the suspension order was improperly continued without a proper complaint or evidence and ordered its immediate withdrawal, payment of salary and benefits, while allowing the departmental inquiry to proceed. The Court also directed the department to conclude the inquiry within six months and dismissed the petition on the remaining issues.
Issues considered
- Whether the suspension order under Rule 9(1)(k) of the Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 is valid in the absence of a complaint or evidence.
- Whether the departmental proceeding initiated by Memo No. 7290 dated 24.04.2025 is ultra vires or defective.
- Whether the three‑man committee inquiry report dated 04.12.2024 can be quashed.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim relief pending the hearing of the writ petition.
Subjects
- suspension
- departmental inquiry
- civil service rules
- writ of certiorari
- viral video
- administrative law
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7914 of 2025
======================================================
Shishir Kumar Mishra Son of Sashi Kishore Mishra, Resident of 36a, Sharda
Sadan, Gandhi Nagar,Boring Road, Budda Colony, Patna P.S. Sri Krishna
Puri, PO- GPO and District Patna, Bihar Pin Code- 800001.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, General
Administration Department, New Secretariat, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, New
Secretariat, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Under Secretary to the Government, General Administration
Department, New Secretariat, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Divisional Commissioner, Saharsa.
5. The District Magistrate, Madhepura.
6. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Madhepura.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Manini Jaiswal, Advocate
Mr.Manas Rajdeep, Advocate
Ms. Adya Pandey, Advocate
Ms. Megha Rani, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Vagisha Pragya Vacaknavi, AC to SC-9
Ms. Sushmita Sharma, AC to SC-9
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
ORAL ORDER
5 02-02-2026 The instant writ petition has been filed by the
petitioner, who is a Additional Collector of Madhepura district
for the following reliefs:-
“(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ
in the nature of certiorari quashing the
Notification contained in Memo No.- 7290 dated
24.04.2025 issued under the signature of the
Under Secretary to the Government whereby and
where under the Govt. has decided to initiate a
Patna High Court CWJC No.7914 of 2025(5) dt.02-02-2026
2/5
departmental proceeding against the Petitioner to
terms of Rule 17 of the Civil Service
(Classification, Control and Appeal) Rule, 2005
herein after refer to as Rule 2005.
(ii) For quashing the resolution
contained in Memo No.-956 dated 16.01.2025
issued under the signature of Under Secretary to
the Government of the Respondent General,
Administration Department whereby and where
under the Petitioner has put under suspension in
terms of Rule 9 (1) (k) of the Rule 2005.
(iii) For quashing the three man
committee inquiry report dated 04.12.2024
communicated vide Letter No. 592/khel (sports)
issued under signature of Deputy Development
Commissioner, Madhepura who have submitted
the report in most mechanical manner.
(iv) Pending hearing of the writ petition
stay the operation of the Notification contained in
Memo No.- 7290 dated 24.04.2025 issued under
the signature of the Under Secretary to the
Government initiate a whereby and where under
the Govt. has decided to departmental proceeding
against the Petitioner to terms of Rule 17 of the
Civil Service (Classification. Control and Appeal)
Rule, 2005 herein after refer to as Rule 2005 and
order of suspension vide Memo No.- 956 dated
16.01.2025.
(v) Any other order or orders as your
Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts
Patna High Court CWJC No.7914 of 2025(5) dt.02-02-2026
3/5
and circumstances of the case be granted to the
petitioner.”
2. I have heard the learned Advocates for the writ-
petitioner and the State-Respondents.
3. I have also perused the factual aspect stated in the
writ petition and partly contradicted in the counter affidavit.
4. It is contended on behalf of the writ-petitioner that
upon an allegation based on a viral video, the petitioner was
suspended on 16.01.2025, till date he is under order of
suspension. The said viral video is the basis of a departmental
proceeding against him. It is held by a Three Men Committee
that proposed the order of suspension and initiation of
departmental proceeding that the videography in question
allegedly establishes an allegation that the petitioner while
playing Badminton assaulted another player.
5. The learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioner
further submits that the person, who was assaulted and injured
did not lodge any complaint either before the higher Authority
of the petitioner or to the police station. The Three Men
Committee also did not examine him. Therefore, the order of
initiation of disciplinary proceeding is bad in law.
6. The learned Advocate on behalf of the State-
Respondents, on the other hand, submits that a departmental
Patna High Court CWJC No.7914 of 2025(5) dt.02-02-2026
4/5
proceeding at the initial stage may only be challenged, when it
is initiated not by the Competent Authority but by some other
persons who is not authorized under Bihar Government Servants
(Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 or that
memorandum of charge suffers from inherent defect. On the
face of it or that even no evidence is proposed in the
memorandum of charge in support of the charge. When the
departmental proceeding was initiated by a Competent
Authority, the objection that it was initiated on the basis of lack
of evidence is a ground to be considered after the departmental
proceeding only.
7. I am in agreement with the learned Advocate on
behalf of the State-Respondents with regard to her averment on
continuation of departmental proceeding.
8. However, I am also in agreement with the learned
Advocate for the petitioner so far as her submission that the
order of suspension is wrongly been continued, even after three
months of passing of such order.
9. In view of such finding, the respondents are
directed to withdraw the order of suspension with immediate
effect against the writ-petitioner and permit him to pursue his
regular work, he will also be paid his regular salary and other
Patna High Court CWJC No.7914 of 2025(5) dt.02-02-2026
5/5
benefits.
10. However, the departmental proceeding was
continued with liberty to the petitioner to agitate any finding of
the department proceeding after extortion of the provisions of
appeal before this Court, if such occasion arises in future.
11. The respondents are further directed to conclude
the department proceeding preferably within six months from
the date of communicated of this order.
12. With the above order, the instant writ petition is
disposed of on contest. However, there shall be no order as to
cost.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
mdrashid/-
U
Checking your session…