Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KARDAK ETE
Arafad Alom Bora, S/o Mr Sahanur Alom – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam Rep By The Commissioner And Secretary To The Govt Of Assam Revenue And Disaster Management Deptt. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
KARDAK ETE, J.
Heard Mr. D. Saraf, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue for the respondents No. 1 and 2 and Mr. D. Borah, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.
2. Challenge made in this petition is to the order of suspension dated 07.02.2024 passed by District Commissioner, Biswanath, whereby, the petitioner has been placed under suspension in connection with Vigilance and Anti- Corruption, Assam Case No. ACB PS Case No. 14/2024 under Section 7 (a) PC Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018) and for a direction to reinstate the petitioner on the ground that even after submission of charge-sheet/memorandum of charges, the petitioner has been continued to be placed under suspension without passing a reasoned order extending the period of suspension.
3. The petitioner was appointed as Lot Mandal in the Office of the Circle Officer, Naduar Revenue Circle, Sootea under the then Sonitpur District (now Biswanath District) on 23.03.2023. He was arrested in connection with ACB PS Case No. 14/2024 under Section 7 (a) PC Act, 1988 on the basis of ejahar filed by one Aliullah Ahmed alleging of accepting Rs.2000/- as bribe.
The suspension order and its extensions were upheld as procedural and compliant with statutory provisions, emphasizing the need for timely completion of disciplinary proceedings.
An order of suspension lapses if not reviewed within 90 days, and cannot be extended indefinitely without justification.
The failure to timely review a suspension after the issuance of a Memorandum of Charges renders the suspension invalid, mandating reinstatement.
A suspension order cannot extend beyond three months without a charge sheet and review, as established in Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India.
Suspension orders must be reasoned if extended beyond three months, especially when charges are served, as per the Supreme Court's ruling.
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....
Prolonged suspension of a government employee requires adequate justification, especially when delays in departmental proceedings are not attributable to the employee.
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
