Back
GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J
Ikbal Ahmed S/o Lutfur Rahman – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam And 3 Ors – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
Heard Mr. Devarshi Sen Deka, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Gogoi, learned standing counsel, Forest Department, appearing on behalf of all the respondents.
2. The petitioner, herein, by way of instituting the present writ petition, has presented a challenge to an order, dated 15.06.2024, issued by the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Environment & Forest, placing him under suspension, invoking the provisions of Rule 61(a)&(c) of the Assam Services(Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964.
3. As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner, at the time of his suspension, was working as a Range Forest Office, Jorhat Range, Jorhat Division. In pursuance of the petitioner being placed under suspension vide order, dated 15.06.2024, the disciplinary authority of the petitioner, had initiated a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner, herein, under the provisions of Rule 9 of the Assam Services(Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964, read with Article 311 of the Constitution of India, by way of issuance of a Show Cause Notice, dated 09.08.2024.
4. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that
Suspension orders must comply with Supreme Court guidelines, requiring a reasoned extension beyond three months; failure to do so renders the suspension unsustainable.
Suspension orders must comply with Supreme Court directives, requiring a reasoned extension if a charge sheet is served; otherwise, they are unsustainable.
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.
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 order of suspension must be communicated to the affected employee to be valid; failure to communicate results in unauthorized continuation of suspension.
The requirement of reviewing suspension orders within 90 days, as mandated by the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964, applies to deemed suspensions as well, and failure to conduct the....
Point of Law : Mandate of an outer limit of 3 (three) months is only for the purpose of drawing up a departmental proceeding and the requirement to undertake an exercise of review prior to the said p....
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
