Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.

1. The petitioner, in this writ petition, has prayed for quashing the office order under Memo No. 770 dated 28 th April, 2007 (Annexure-3), whereby the petitioner has been put under suspension on the allegation of absence from duty. He has also prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the arrears of subsistence allowance for the period of suspension/and full salary.

2. The petitioner is at present posted as Assistant Teacher in Middle School, Harladih, Block Pirtand, District Giridih. It has been stated that the petitioner has is at the last stage of his service career and is due to retire on 31 st July, 2008. It has been stated that suddenly the petitioner was stopped from working on the ground that he was put under suspension and even the order of suspension was not made available to him. Ultimately, the petitioner had to take resort of the provision of the Right to Information Act for obtaining the copy of the suspension order. The petitioner, thereafter, came to know that he was put under suspension on the allegation that he was found absent during "SCHOOL CHALE HAM Campaign 2007". The petitioner has contended that the order of suspension is wholly illegal, arbitrary and is liable to be quashed.

3. It has been submitted that an employee can be put under suspension only during the pendency of the departmental proceeding or criminal proceeding or in contemplation of the departmental proceeding, but there has been neither any departmental proceeding nor criminal proceeding and as such, the order of suspension, being based on no valid ground, is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction. It has further been submitted that even the petitioner has not been given subsistence allowance of the suspension period and he has been kept under suspension for more than one year and no order has been passed till date, revoking the suspension or otherwise.

4. The respondents have contested the petitioners claim. Learned J.C. to G.P.I appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the petitioner was put under suspension, as he was found absent during "SCHOOL CHALEN HAM Campaign 2007" by the Secretary, Road Construction Department, and as such the order of suspension is not arbitrary or illegal. It has been submitted that though the instruction was sought as far back as on 29.10.2007 from District Superintendent, of Education, Giridih, but till date, he did not turn up to file counter affidavit.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and considered the facts and materials on record.

6. From Annexure-3, it is evident that the petitioner was put under suspension by the order of the District Superintendent of Education, Giridih vide his Memo No. 770 dated 28 th April, 2007 and It was alleged in the said order that the petitioner was found absent from the 6chool and it was complained that the meal was not being distributed. In the said order, it was also mentioned that the petitioner will get the subsistence allowance during the period of suspension and PRAPATRA-KA shall be issued separately.

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order was not even served on the petitioner and the petitioner was not paid even the subsistence allowance during the period of suspension. No departmental proceeding has been initiated till date, though the petitioner has been put under suspension for more than a year. Learned Counsel submitted that an employee can be put under suspension only during the pendency of the departmental proceeding or any criminal proceeding or in contemplation thereof, but even after lapse of more than one year, there has been no trace of any departmental proceeding or criminal proceeding against the petitioner, and there was no basis for the issuance of the impugned order, and the same is wholly illegal and arbitrary. It has been submitted that the petitioner is due to retire on 31 st July, 2008 and if the impugned order is not quashed and the petitioners s