A Government servant who is detained in custody for a period exceeding 48 hours is deemed to be under suspension from the date of his detention, and the suspension does not automatically come to an end with the discharge of the Government servant from the criminal proceeding.

( 1 ) THE petitioner of this writ petition filed under Article 226 joined service as Inspector of Co-operative Societies, Burdwan Municipal Circle and the Burdwan Range-I on 9-4-77. Whip serving in Burdwan Municipal Circle he was also appointed to act as Administrator of Southend Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. By order dated 10-2-78 the petitioner was transferred from Burdwan Municipal Circle to Kurshiang Development Block. It is the contention of the respondents that the petitioner remained absent from his duties from 2-3-78 without praying for leave or showing any reason and without permission from the Authority. Thereafter a departmental proceeding was started against the petitioner under Memo No. 772 dated 11-1-79. On 12-7-79, Krishna Gopal Bose, Inspector of Co-operative Societies of Burdwan Municipal Circle lodged F. I. R. with police for defalcation of funds and in that connection the petitioner was arrested by the police from Udaypur under Nimta P. S. on 20-5-79 and produced before the S. D. J. M. , Barrackpore in connection with the Burdwan P. S. Case No. 53 dated 12-7-79 under section 409 I. P. C. He was in detention in connection with the said case till he was released on bail on 10-9-79. In course of time police submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner under section 409 I. P. C. on the allegation that the petitioner while working as Administrator, Southend Co-operative Housing Society used to draw money from Burdwan Central Co-op. Bank and on different dates through cheques he withdrew a sum of Rs. 17,982/- from Burdwan Central Co-op. Bank but did not deposit that amount in office and misappropriated the same. Accordingly, Special Case No. 6 of 1982 was started and on 21-9-89 the Judge, First Special Court, Burdwan discharged the petitioner accused under section 245 Cr. P. C. holding that there was no prima facie case against the accused. Annexure-C to the writ petition is a copy of that order. It appears from a perusal of the said order that although the prosecution examined some witnesses, it was submitted before the learned Trial Judge on behalf of the prosecution that the case had had been lost and all other relevant papers were not traceable and as such it was futile to examine further witnesses in the case. The learned Trial Judge observed that from the evidence on record it could at best be stated that the accused withdrew some money from Bank but practically there was no evidence of mis-appropriation of money and it had not been established that the accused did not deposit the money as withdrawn by him from Bank in the capacity of Administrator. After his discharge from the case the petitioner made representation for various reliefs including joining duties, payment of salary etc. but to no effect and consequently the petitioner has come up before this court for appropriate relief under Article 226.

( 2 ) IT appears that although there was no formal order of suspension either in connection with the departmental proceeding started against him or in connection with the criminal case and arrest, the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, as is the case of the respondents, by mistake and misunderstanding informed the learned Special Court that the petitioner was under suspension for along time and his whereabouts were not known to the Directorate. It may be incidentally mentioned here that the departmental proceeding started against the petitioner was is connection with different matters and not in connection with matters pertaining to the police case or for that matter the Special Court case in connection with which he was arrested.

( 3 ) THE main point urged before me on behalf of the respondents is that since there was no formal order of suspension against the petitioner and since the petitioner was absent from duty on and from 2-3-78 without leave or permission and since his whereabouts were also not known or informed, he has ceased to be in Government service. In