Back
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
Hari Prasad Das S/o Late Sonabar Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA, J.
Heard Mr. P. K. Roychoudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. K. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department.
2. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the impugned order dated 08.06.2024 passed by the respondent No. 1, by which the suspension order dated 14.10.2023 of the petitioner has been extended by another three months. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the order extending the suspension of the petitioner is not a reasoned order, in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India , reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291 . He accordingly submits that the impugned order dated 08.06.2024 should be set aside and the petitioner should be reinstated into service as Block Elementary Education Officer (BEEO), Chaiduar Education Block, Gohpur, Biswanath district.
3. Mr. P. K. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department submits that as there had been a review of the suspension order of the petitioner and as there has been an extension of the same due to proper reasons, there is no ground
Suspension orders must be reasoned if extended beyond three months, especially when charges are served, as per the Supreme Court's ruling.
A suspension order cannot extend beyond three months without a charge sheet and review, as established in Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India.
The suspension order and its extensions were upheld as procedural and compliant with statutory provisions, emphasizing the need for timely completion of disciplinary proceedings.
The failure to timely review a suspension after the issuance of a Memorandum of Charges renders the suspension invalid, mandating reinstatement.
Suspension orders must comply with procedural requirements, including a reasoned extension within three months, as established by the Supreme Court, failing which the order is unsustainable.
Suspension orders in disciplinary proceedings must be reviewed within 90 days; otherwise, they become invalid, ensuring the right to a fair trial and administrative efficiency.
An order of suspension lapses if not reviewed within 90 days, and cannot be extended indefinitely without justification.
Suspension orders requiring review must be executed within 90 days, and failure to serve charges timely invalidates extensions beyond this period.
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
