Suspension must comply with procedural rules regarding timelines and grounds; lapses invalidate continuation beyond stipulated periods.

ORDER

Per Hon’ble Mr. Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member :

1. The applicant has filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act , 1985, praying for the following relief(s):

“(a) An order be passed quashing and/or setting aside the order of suspension dated 17.07.2020 issued by the Superintendent of Post Offices vide a memo no. F/Suri H.O./NREGA/Fraud/Misc.

(b) An order be passed quashing and/or setting aside the speaking and/or reasoned order dated 20.02.2025, passed by the Director of Postal Services, Kolkata region vide memo no. PMG(KR)/Vig/Rev/Sus/14/S.Alam.

(c) An order be passed directing the respondent authorities concerned, to disburse balance salary of the petitioner for the period spent in suspension on and from 17.07.2020 to 03.03.2021.

(d) An order to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 03.02.2022 passed by the authority.

(e) An order be passed directing the respondent authorities concerned to reinstate the applicant to regular service at a less sensitive post, in view of the long period spent under suspension and regularised the period of suspension for all purpose along with all consequential service benefits.”

2. Facts as narrated by the applicant in the O.A are as follows:

The applicant joined as Postal Assistant on 24.01.2011 under the Department of Posts, Birbhum Division. The applicant was served with an order of suspension on 17.07.2020. The same has been reviewed on numerous occasions and the same remains in subsistence till date vide extensions issued from time to time. Three days after issuance of the first order of suspension, Suri Police Station Case No. 196 of 2020 was registered against the applicant on the basis of a complaint lodged by the then Superintendent of Post Office (Birbhum Division) wherein, it was alleged that the applicant had committed offences punishable under Sections 409, 417, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code 1860. The crux of the allegation centred around the alleged involvement of the petitioner in the misappropriation of funds sanctioned in relation to Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme by misusing his role as the person responsible for transfer of funds to the respective beneficiaries. In relation to the aforementioned Suri Police Station Case No. 196 of 2020, charge sheet had been filed on 08.04.2021 under Sections 403, 406, 409 and 417 of the IPC read with Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act 2000. A supplementary charge sheet had also been filed on 25.04.2022. Charges were framed on 06.12.2021. The applicant was taken into custody on 03.03.2021 upon surrender before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Birbhum. Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta allowed bail to the applicant subject to certain conditions vide an order dated 07.10.2024. Within a month of being released on bail, the applicant made a written representation on 11.11.2024 before the respondent authorities praying for revocation of the suspension order dated 17.07.2020. A further representation dated 08.01.2025 was also made as a reminder but to no avail. Upon being aggrieved by the continued subsistence of the order of suspension dated 17.07.2020 without initiation of disciplinary proceeding, the applicant filed an original application being O.A. No. 350/00068/2025, praying for an order to revoke/set aside/quash the order of suspension. The original application was disposed of by this Tribunal by an order dated 30.01.2025, directing the respondent authorities to treat the original application as part of the applicant's representation dated 11.11.2024 and to dispose of