Point of Law
An order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under sub-rule (1) or (2) of this rule, shall not be valid after a period of ninety days unless it is extended after review, for a further period before the expiry of ninety days.

JUDGMENT :

N.V.ANJARIA, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Nasir Saiyed for the petitioner and learned advocate Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Jayneel Parikh for the respondent state and its authorities.

2. The challenge in this petition is directed against order of suspension passed against the petitioner on 30th March, 2016. The petitioner has prayed to set aside the order and to revoke the suspension.

3. The petitioner came to be appointed as Junior Assistant Electrical Inspector, Class-II. He was on probation for two years in the pay scale of 6500-200-10500. On 23rd February, 2011, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Electrical Inspector on ad hoc basis on 20th December, 2010, subsequently regularised on 23rd February, 2011, and came to be transferred to Godhra.

3.1 It appears that a complaint against the petitioner alleging commission of offence under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 came to be filed against the petitioner. An FIR being Crime Register No. (I) 3 of 2016 dated 21st February, 2015 came to be registered against the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested and since he remained in the custody for more than 48 hours, he was placed under deemed suspension from 02nd February, 2016 to 19th February, 2016. The petitioner was released on regular bail by order dated 19th February, 2016 by the competent court.

3.2 The suspension was continued. The respondent authority went on passing orders extending the suspension period. The petitioner has stated that the chargesheet was already filed by the police authorities before the competent court. The petitioner requested the respondents to reinstate him by cancelling the suspension. While representing for revocation of suspension, it was submitted by the petitioner that long time had elapsed and departmental proceedings were not initiated and that continuation of suspension was unreasonable.

4. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the suspension continued arbitrarily only on the ground of pendency of criminal proceedings wherein charge sheet was already filed. It was submitted that even when the suspension period was extended by the various orders no reasons were stated. It was stated that resolution dated 23rd March, 2005 produced by the respondents along with the affidavit-in-reply contained the guidelines which are breached in case of the petitioner in continuing the suspension for long three years.

4.1 As against this, learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the respondent authorities were within their right to suspend the petition who was facing trial for offences under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It was submitted that every time the report was called for regarding progress of the criminal case before extending the suspension period.

4.2 The petition was contested by filling affidavit-in-reply in which respondent No.1 inter alia mentioned about the filling of the First Information Report against the petitioner; his detainment in custody and further that their action is backed by the powers vested in them under Rule 5 of Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1971. It was stated that the suspension of the petitioner was time to time extended. The respondent produced resolution dated 23rd March, 2005, which deals with the guidelines for reviewing the cases of the employees placed under suspension, which inter alia provided that suspension would be reviewed every six months after the chargesheet is served. It was mentioned that in such cases, where the criminal case was registered and police had filed chargesheet and period of more than one year has passed, the suspension would be required to be reviewed. The aforesaid condition in the said resolution had the genesis of Rule 5 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1971, which is extensively referred to hereinafter.

4.3 Giving the details about the extension of suspension from time to time produced along with the