Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI†
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.
Nirakar Mallick S/o Maguni Mallick - Petitioner
V.
The Union of India and Ors. - Respondent
WP (C) 5606 of 2018
Decided On : 14-11-2018
Central Civil Services - An order of suspension passed by Registrar University has been assailed in this writ petition - Although on earlier occasion a stand had been taken by respondent University that said suspension order would be withdrawn but for certain given reasons and circumstances prevailing in University same could not be done - However learned senior counsel for petitioner refers to provisions of Rule of Central Civil Services Rules which inter alia provides that order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under Rule shall not be valid after a period of ninety days unless it is extended after review for a further period before expiry of ninety days - Held, A bare perusal of Rule makes it implicit that an order of suspension would not remain valid after a period of ninety days in event same is not reviewed and extended further - In instant case it is taken note of that order of suspension but thereafter said order had neither been reviewed nor been extended by authorities - In event of order being not reviewed or extended by operation of provision of Rule of Central Civil Services Rules said order ceases to exist after expiry of ninety days from date of order - As said period of ninety days is already over order of suspension no longer exists - Order accordingly.
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.
Heard Mr. RP Kakoti, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. SC Keyal, learned standing counsel for the respondent, Assam University.
2. An order of suspension dated 30.07.2018 passed by the Registrar, Assam University has been assailed in this writ petition. Although on earlier occasion, a stand had been taken by the respondent Assam University that the said suspension order would be withdrawn but for certain given reasons and the circumstances prevailing in the University, the same could not be done. However, today Mr. RP Kakoti, learned senior counsel for the petitioner refers to the provisions of Rule 10(7) of the Central Civil Services Rules which inter alia provides that the order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under Rule 10(1) or Rule 10(2) 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. Rule 10(7) is as follows:
“10(7): 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”.
3. A bare perusal of Rule 10(7) makes it implicit that an order of suspension would not remain valid after a period of ninety days in the event, the same is not reviewed and extended further. In the instant case, it is taken note of that the order of suspension is dated 30.07.2018, but thereafter the said order had neither been reviewed nor been extended by the authorities. In the event of the order being not reviewed or extended, by operation of the provision of Rule 10(7) of the Central Civil Services Rules, the said order ceases to exist after the expiry of ninety days from the date of the order i.e. 30.07.2018. As the said period of ninety days is already over, the order of suspension dated 30.07.2018 no longer exists.
4. In view of the above, no further adjudication is required in this writ petition and the same stands closed.
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
