ORDER S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This application has been preferred by the petitioners against the order, contained in Memo No. 3099 dated 10th November, 2001, issued by the D.S.E., Dumka, whereby and whereunder, it has been ordered that the petitioners will not get any salary for the period of suspension. 2. It appears that proceedings were initiated as in surprise inspection, the petitioners and some others were found absent on a day and they were placed under suspension, vide order dated 12th April, 2001. It is only after receipt of reply and submission of enquiry report, the impugned order has been issued by the D.S.E., Dumka. 3. It may be mentioned that the order relating to non-payment of salary for the period of suspension is not punishment, thus the impugned order No. 3099 dated 10th November, 2001 to that extent is wrong, wherein it is mentioned that the non-payment of salary for the period of suspension has been passed by way of punishment. In fact, the order dated 10th November, 2001 relating to payment of salary for the period of suspension should have been passed under Rule 97 of the Bihar Service Code in the light of finding of the Enquiry Officer. 4. In the facts and circumstances, though the Court is not inclined to interfere with the order dated 10th November, 2001 for the present, but remit the case to the D.S.E., Dumka who will supply a copy of the enquiry report to the petitioners and then decide as to what salary to which one or other petitioner will be entitled as per Rule 97 of the Bihar Service Code within a month from the date of service of enquiry report. 5. The enquiry report should be served on the petitioners within fifteen days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 6. If on the basis of report, one or other petitioner is found to have been exonerated of the allegation, the D.S.E., Dumka will recall the order dated 10th November, 2001 in respect to such petitioners. 7. The writ petition stands disposed of.