The high court on Tuesday reserved its order on the suspension of Patna Municipal Corporation commissioner Kuldip Narayan, a day after it stayed the state government’s order to put him under suspension.

The division bench of Justice V.N. Sinha and Justice P.K. Jha reserved its judgment while hearing a case related to illegal mushrooming of high-rises in the city. Earlier, the state government tabled the file containing the proposal to place the municipal commissioner under suspension before the court according to its directive.

While principal additional advocate-general (PAAG) Lalit Kishore claimed that commissioner Narayan was put under suspension in the larger interest of the corporation and the state, the bench appreciated the suspended officer’s effort to tackle the menace of illegal constructions in the city. Justice Sinha said: “He (Narayan) was not giving in to the pressure of those against whom there were charges. He was trying to stand firm.”

Justice Sinha said: “The suspension of the commissioner was an extreme step and tantamount to the violation of the high court order by which the court is aggrieved.”

On this, PAAG Kishore said transfer and suspension were two different things. “The high court restraint was only with respect to the transfer of the officer (the PMC commissioner) and therefore, the order was not applicable to suspension. Hence, permission was not required from the court,” he said.

The bench differed. Justice Sinha said: “But, you (the government) should have sought our permission before suspending the commissioner.” He said suspension and transfer were equivalent to the removal of the officer, on which the high court had earlier put a stay.

The submission made by the state government to the court on Tuesday also questioned the judicial propriety of the court as PAAG Kishore in his submission stated that the order passed by the division bench comprising acting Chief Justice Iqbal Ahmed Ansari while hearing a separate PIL on Monday was brought to the notice of this bench (read Justice Sinha and Justice Jha) and according to judicial propriety this bench (Justice Sinha and Justice Jha) should not have passed order in contradiction to the bench comprising the acting Chief Justice. Kishore further said the order of the coordinated bench (the one comprising the acting Chief Justice) should not be undone by this bench (Justice Sinha and Justice Jha).

This submission by the government infuriated the bench of Justice Sinha and Justice Jha as the former said: “Either we have our say or don’t. Let the other bench decide this issue. We are not the sole custodian. Let mushrooming (of high-rises) grow.” Justice Sinha also said: “He (the PMC commissioner) may be an ordinary officer or a corrupt one but before suspending him it should have been brought to our notice.”