Judgment G.C. Bharuka & Gurusharan Sharma, JJ. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner for quashing an order of suspension dated 30.8.1973 contained in Memo No. 162, passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Champaran (Respondent no.2) and for suitable direction for payment of his salary. 2. I may first notice the facts as set out by the petitioner in the writ application in support of his claim. According to him, he was appointed as an Assistant teacher on 1.4.1951. While he was posted as an Assistant teacher in Upper Primary School, Ram Nagar, Bankat, Majhaulia, during a surprise inspection by respondent no.2 the petitioner was found absent. So he was put under suspension by the impugned order contained in Annexure 2. According to the petitioner, the suspension was wholly illegal and without jurisdiction since on the date of inspection he was on duly sanctioned leave. Subsequently he was served with a charge sheet dated 10.1.1974 (Annexure-3) in compliance whereof he fi1cd his explanation. But till this date neither the suspension of the petitioner has been revoked nor he it being paid subsistence allowance since March, 1979. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent District Superintendent of Education, West Champaran, wherein it has been stated that after suspension the Head Quarters of the petitioner were made at the Office of the Block Development Officer, Majhaulia and he was paid his subsistence allowance till February, 1977. But since March, 1977 his subsistence allowance was stopped in want of his absentee statement by the Block Development Officer. In paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit it has been stated that suddenly in June, 1992 one person claiming himself to be Haribans Prasad Singh (the petitioner) filed a representation for payment of his subsistence allowance and conclusion of departmental proceedings. Accordingly, an enquiry has been set up for ascertaining the genuineness of the identity and claim of the petitioner and to ascertain the reasons as to under what circumstances the departmental proceeding has remained unconcluded. In paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit it has been stated that since the old District known as Champaran has, been bifurcated into two districts, East and West Champaran, in the year 1974, it may take two or three months in locating the paper relating to the teacher Haribans Prasad Singh. This affidavit has been filed on 26.6.1993. In paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit it has been stated that since the old District known as Champaran has, been bifurcated into two districts, East and West Champaran, in the year 1974, it may take two or three months in locating the paper relating to the teacher Haribans Prasad Singh. This affidavit has been filed on 26.6.1993. We hope and trust that by this Lime respondent no.2 must have been able to locate the papers and complete his enquiry in relation to the claim of the petitioner. 4. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we direct the Director, Primary Education, to look into the matter, and enquire about the claim of the petitioner after calling for all the relevant papers from the office of Respondent no. 2 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. We are sure that he will definitely apply himself to find out (i) as to under what circumstances the depart mental proceedings have remained pending for more than 20 years, (ii) as to whether the person claiming himself to be Haribans Prasad Singh is the genuine claimant (iii) Whether the services or the said Haribans Prasad Singh has ever been taken over by the Government pursuant to the nationalisation of the School (iv) the consequences of absence of the said Haribans Prasad Singh from the Head Quarters since 1977 and the like matters having direct bearing on the claim involved in this writ application. The, matter should be disposed or within six weeks from the date of communication of this order. The petitioner, if so advised, may file his representation within two weeks setting out all the relevant facts and may also seek an opportunity of personal hearing on the date fixed by the learned Director for the purpose. The writ application is accordingly disposed of.