HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Sinha
SURYA KUMAR CHATTERJEE - Appellant
Versus
S. N. BANERJEE - Respondent
Matter 78 Of 1953
Decided On : MARCH 11, 1954
SERVICE LAW - SUSPENSION - RULES - INTERPRETATION - POSTAL EMPLOYEES - SUSPENSION DURING PERIOD OF DETENTION IN CUSTODY OR IMPRISONMENT - SPECIFIC ORDER NECESSARY FOR SUSPENSION DURING PERIOD WHEN NOT DETAINED IN CUSTODY OR IMPRISONED - RULES FRAMED UNDER STATUTORY POWERS - APPLICABILITY.
Fact of the Case:
Two postal employees were arrested and charged with certain offenses. They were placed under suspension by a memorandum issued by the Superintendent of Post Office. The employees were discharged from the criminal charges, but the suspension order remained in effect. They challenged the suspension order through a mandamus proceeding.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the suspension order was not valid because it was not made in accordance with the rules framed under statutory powers. The rules provided that a government servant could be automatically suspended during the period of detention in custody or imprisonment, but a specific order was necessary for suspension during a period when the employee was not detained in custody or imprisoned. No such specific order was made in this case.
Issues: Whether the suspension order was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the suspension order was not valid because it was not made in accordance with the rules framed under statutory powers. The rules provided that a government servant could be automatically suspended during the period of detention in custody or imprisonment, but a specific order was necessary for suspension during a period when the employee was not detained in custody or imprisoned. No such specific order was made in this case.
Final Decision: The court made the rule absolute and directed the respondents to forbear from giving effect to the order of suspension of the petitioners dated 5-9-1950, or keeping the petitioners under suspension by virtue of that order.
( 1 ) THE petitioners before me are two clerks employed in the Mission Row Post Office (subordinate service ). It appears that on 5th of September 1950, a memorandum was issued by the Superintendent of Post Office, South Calcutta Division, to the following effect:"the under-mentioned officials having been arrested by the police under Sections 261, 262 and 420, I. P. C. Section 5 (2) of Act II of 1947 and conspiracy under section 120b, I. P. C. are placed under suspension with effect from the afternoon of 2-9-1950. (1) Sri Hemanta Kumar Bhattacharjee, S. P. M. , Mission Row. (2) Sri Surya Kumar Chatterjee, Clerk Mission Row, T. S. O. (3) Mahadeo Singh, clerk, Mission Row, T. S. O. For the first year of their suspension Sri Hemanta Kumar Bhattacharjee and Sri Surya Kumar Chatterjee will receive- as their subsistence grant half the average pay drawn by them during the 12 months preceding the date of suspension. They will get no allowance. During the subsequent period of suspension they will get 3/8th of the above-mentioned average pay. Mahadeo Singh will receive as subsistence grant for the first year of his suspension half the average pay drawn by him during the 12 months preceding the date of suspension and allowance as admissible to him. During the subsequent period of suspension he will get 3/8th of the above-mentioned average pay. "
( 2 ) IT will thus appear that three officials in cluding the petitioners had been charged with certain offences and had been arrested by the police. By this memorandum, they were placed under sus pension. These persons were sent up for trial before the Chief Presidency Magistrate, but all of them were discharged on 13-10-1950. On 24-6-1953, they were served with summons to appear before the Special Judge Sri B. C. Ghosh, Special Court. Criminal Jurisdiction, Calcutta, to answer various charges. One of the accused, Hemanta Kumar Bhattacharjee, made an applica tion to this High Court challenging the jurisdiction of the Special Judge. He also made an applica tion challenging the order of his suspension. In respect of the first application, it was held by a Special Bench consisting of the learned Chief Justice Sir Arthur Trevor Harries, Das and Das Gupta JJ. that the Special Judge had no juris diction. With regard to the second application, the matter was decided by Bose J. , -- 'hemanta Kumar v. N. N. Sen Gupta'. The learned Judge considered regulations 17 and 21 of the general regulation contained in the Posts and Telegraphs Manual, Vol. II, and came to the conclusion that the order of suspension was made under regulation 21 (e) (iii) and as the petitioner Hemanta Kumar Bhattacharjee was not then in police custody or undergoing imprisonment this suspension order could not be supported. As regards regulation 17, the learned Judge held that there was no evidence that investigations were continuing. The postal authorities were directed to forbear from giving effect to the order of suspension dated the 5th of September 1950 or keeping the petitioner under suspension by virtue of that order. It is unnecessary for me to consider the other facts which had taken place in respect of the criminal action against the petitioners. It is admitted that they are neither under arrest nor undergoing imprisonment although the proceedings are still pending. In fact, they have not been under arrest nor have they been in prison since the first arrest mentioned above which gave rise to the memorandum dated 5-9-1950. So far as the decision of Bose J. mentioned above is concerned, it appears that the attention of the learned Judge was not drawn to the fact that the rules contained in the general regulations, Vol. II of the Posts and Telegraphs Manual are not statutory rules but are merely departmental instructions. This appears from the preface which runs as follows:"the Volumes of the Posts and Telegraphs Manual contain mainly the rules intended for the guidance and instructions of Officers of the department f
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.