Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 11141

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J
Lohit Das – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
WP(C)/5517/2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sarfraz Nawaz, MD A Rahman, Samim Rahman, Suraya Rahman, Surajit Das, A W Aman
For the Respondents: M Bhattacharjee

A suspension order loses its currency if no formal departmental charge-sheet is served within three months, and a mere show-cause notice does not constitute the institution of a formal disciplinary proceeding, rendering prolonged suspension without a reasoned extension order legally unsustainable.

Headnote:(A) Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 - Rule 6 and 6(1) - Constitution of India - Art. 141 - Suspension - Prolonged suspension - Requirement of serving charge-sheet within 3 months - Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary case established that suspension should not exceed 3 months if no charge-sheet is served - If charge-sheet is served, reasoned order must be passed for extension - State government issued Office Memorandum dated 04.02.2020 implementing these principles - In the present case, no departmental proceeding initiated within statutory period - Show Cause Notice issued previously did not constitute initiation of formal disciplinary proceeding - Continued suspension without review/charge-sheet is unsustainable. (Paras 10, 11, 13, 14, 18)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner was placed under suspension on 10.05.2024 following allegations of forgery and job-related fraud. Despite multiple criminal cases registered against him and being arrested/released on bail, no formal departmental charge-sheet was served upon him within the mandatory period, leading the petitioner to seek reinstatement.

Findings of Court:
The court held that a Show Cause Notice issued under Rule 6 of the 1964 Rules does not equate to the initiation of a formal departmental proceeding under Rule 9. As no charge-sheet was served within the 3-month period mandated by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ajay Kumar Choudhary, the suspension lost its currency. The court ordered reinstatement while granting liberty to the State to transfer the petitioner to a non-sensitive post.

Issues: Whether the suspension of the petitioner was valid beyond three months when no formal charge-sheet had been served and whether a Show Cause Notice qualifies as the initiation of a departmental proceeding.

Ratio Decidendi: A suspension order's currency cannot extend beyond 3 months without a formal charge-sheet/memorandum of charges. A mere Show Cause Notice requiring an explanation does not constitute the institution of disciplinary proceedings under the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964. The State must adhere to the principles laid down in Ajay Kumar Choudhary to justify continued suspension.

Result: Petition allowed with directions for reinstatement and liberty to transfer.

Table of Content
1. case facts concerning suspension and pending criminal cases. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments on prolonged suspension and lack of departmental proceeding. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. application of ajay kumar choudhary for suspension time-limits. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. distinction between show-cause notice and formal charge-sheet. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)

ORDER

18/11/2025

Heard Mr. Sarfraz Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents.

2. The petitioner, herein, has assailed an order dated 10.05.2024 issued by the Director of Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam, placing him under suspension.

3. The facts in brief requisite for adjudication of the issues arising in the present proceeding, is noticed hereinbelow:

The petitioner, herein, while working as a Physical Instructor in the Department of Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam and while attached to the office of the Director of Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam, an FIR came to be lodged against him on 06.04.2024, before the Officer-in-Charge, Dispur Police Station, inter-alia, alleging, therein, that the petitioner had forged the signature of the Director of Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam and issued appointment letter to one Shrikant Mahato, showing him to be appointed as a Junior Assistant in the Office of the Director, Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam. It was further alleged that the petitioner was found to be involved in handing over a fake transfer order besides other correspondences. The said FIR came to be registered as Dispur P.S. Case No. 307/2024 under Sections 170/420/468/471 IPC.

Thereafter, a Show Cause Notice dated 12.04.2024 came to be served upon the petitioner under Rule 6 of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964, requiring him to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be initiated against him on the said grounds for which the criminal case was instituted against him. The petitioner replied to the said Show Cause Notice vide his reply dated 18.04.2024 and denied the allegations made against him. Being not satisfied with the reply submitted by the petitioner, the Director of Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam, vide order dated 10.05.2024, proceeded to place the petitioner under suspension, pending drawal of departmental proceedings, invoking the provisions of Rule 6 (1) of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964, (hereinafter, referred to as, the 1964 Rules).

It is revealed from the records that a further FIR was registered against the petitioner before the Gabhoru Pathar Outpost by one Santosh Rawani on 19.07.2024, inter-alia, alleging, therein that the petitioner, herein, had mislead the informant to part with an amount of Rs.3,70,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Seventy Thousand) only, on the assurance of securing a Government job for him. It was also alleged that the petitioner, herein, was involved in similar activities and had received money from various individuals on the pretext of providing Government jobs. The said FIR came to the registered as Gabhoru Pathar Outpost, G.D.E. No. 364, dated 19.07.2024 and thereafter, the same was forwarded to the Officer-in-Charge, Dibrugarh Police Station and accordingly, the said FIR was registered as Dibrugarh P.S. Case No. 279/2024 dated 19.07.2024.

It is to be noted that the petitioner was arrested in connection with Dibrugarh P.S. Case No. 279/2024 on 14.09.2024. The petitioner was enlarged on bail by the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dibrugarh, vide order dated 14.10.2024. The petitioner, being shown arrested in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No. 307/2024, on a bail application being preferred by the petitioner, the petitioner was enlarged on bail by the Court of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), vide order dated 30.11.2024. The petitioner, on being enlarged on bail, had submitted an application on 13.12.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 11141

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATIN. Unni Krishnan Nair, JLohit Das – AppellantVersusState Of Assam – RespondentWP(C)/5517/2025

A suspension order loses its currency if no formal departmental charge-sheet is served within three months, and a mere show-cause notice does not constitute the institution of a formal disciplinary proceeding, rendering prolonged suspension without a reasoned extension order legally unsustainable.

Cases Referred (1)

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J
Lohit Das – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
WP(C)/5517/2025