Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
Abdul Mazid S/o Late Aizuddin Ahmed – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
ORDER :
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA, J.
Heard Mr. Z. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner, who prays that the petitioner should be paid his arrear salary for the period from April, 2023 to February, 2024, amounting to Rs.2,87,912/-, on the ground that the petitioner’s suspension for the above stated period was unjustified.
2. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner, who is a Headmaster of 884 No. Pathimari Lower Primary School, was suspended from service pending a departmental enquiry vide order dated 08.03.2023. The petitioner was issued a show-cause-notice dated 08.07.2023, pertaining to financial anomalies of school grants, irregular attendance in class, failure to place/produce accounts related records, taxes etc. The petitioner submitted his reply to the show-cause-notice on 24.07.2023, denying the said charges.
3. As the petitioner’s suspension had been allowed to continue in violation of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhury Vs. Union of India Through Its Secretary & Anr., reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291, the petitioner filed WP(C) No.5098/2023, praying for setting aside the suspension order and to reinstate him into service. In Para 21 o
Suspension of an employee beyond three months without a charge-sheet is unjustified, entitling the employee to arrear salary for the period of unjustified suspension.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the denial of salary for the suspension period should be in accordance with Fundamental Rules and the principles of natural justice.
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 competent authority must decide on the suspension period; failure to do so entitles the employee to full salary for that period.
The court upheld the authority's discretion to continue suspension in the context of a pending criminal proceeding, considering the seriousness of the charges and the need for further proceedings.
The court ruled that a government servant's suspension period must be treated as on duty with full pay if acquitted of charges and if disciplinary proceedings result in a minor penalty.
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
