Back
SONIA GOKANI, NISHA M. THAKORE
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Neetu Singh W/O Anil Kumar Tripathi – Respondent
ORDER :
SONIA GOKANI, J.
1.0. The petitioners are before this Court aggrieved by the order passed by the Ahmedabad Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad wherein the Tribunal has quashed and set aside the first of order of extension of suspension in view of the FIR No.3 of 2021 dated 27.03.2021 lodged against the respondent in the ACB Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1) and 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
2.0. Brief facts leading to this petition are as follows:
2.1. The respondent was working as Joint Commissioner in the office of the Chief Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Ahmedabad Zone where one complainant lodged complaint dated 26.3.2021 against the respondent for demanding a bribe of Rs.1,50,000/- along with one of Junior Officer before the Anti Corruption Bureau.
2.2 An FIR being 3 of 2021 came to be lodged in ACB Police Station, Ahmedabad against the respondent on 27.3.2021 and she was arrested on the very day by the Anti Corruption Bureau. Considering the complaint and FIR, respondent was placed under suspension by way of order dated 4.5.2021 under Rule 10(2)(a) of the CCA(CCA) Rules, 1965.
2.3. The Ant
Continued suspension without charge sheet issuance past 90 days isn't automatically void; justification based on severity of allegations and public interest may uphold the extension.
Prolonged suspension of a government employee without timely inquiry and review is unreasonable and violates principles of natural justice and the right to a speedy trial.
Prolonged suspension of a government employee without timely inquiry or a reasoned order for extension is unreasonable and violates principles of natural justice and the right to a speedy trial.
Suspension valid if reviewed within 90 days from effective date; delay in charge sheet justified by investigation complexity in large embezzlement.
Suspension valid if reviewed within 90 days from effective date (receipt); delay in charge-sheet justified for serious embezzlement probe.
Suspension review period starts from effective date; valid extension within 90 days despite delayed charge sheet in grave embezzlement cases.
Rights of a suspended employee to life and to a speedy trial qua a DE balanced with obligations - While suspending appellant, DA took care to notice both aspects of deemed suspension following custod....
A suspension order must be accompanied by a reasoned order for extension beyond three months if a charge-sheet is served, ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
