GAHC010172802024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/4333/2024 RAMESH JARADHARA S/O- SRI KAMESWAR JARADHARA, RESIDENT OF BARPATORIA VILLAGE, WARD NO. 1, P.N.G.B.

NEAR DHEMAJI GIRLS COLLEGE, P.O.- DHEMAJI- ASSAM- 787057.

VERSUS ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK AND 2 ORS HEAD OFFICE, G.S. ROAD, BHANGAGARH, GUWAHATI- 781006.

2:THE CHAIRMAN ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI- 781006.

3:THE GENERAL MANAGER ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI- 781006 Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. R SARMAH, MS P SAHA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, A G V B, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

ORDER

Date : 19.02.2026 Heard Mr. R Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A Ganguly, learned standing counsel, A.G.V.B, Assam, appearing for all the respondents.

2. The petitioner, in the present proceedings, has raised a grievance, with regard to the non-regularization of his period of suspension for about 19 (Nineteen) months after the disciplinary proceedings instituted against him had culminated with imposition of a penalty upon him.

3. The petitioner, while being posted as Manager, Operations at the Sivasagar Branch of the respondent Bank, was alleged to have committed a misconduct and accordingly, basing on such allegations, the petitioner came to be placed under suspension vide an order dated 23.08.2012. Thereafter, the departmental proceeding was instituted against the petitioner, basing on an allegation of having misappropriated an amount of Rs. 6241/- (Rupees Six Thousand Two Hundred and Forty One Only). On conclusion of the said departmental proceeding, the disciplinary authority of the petitioner, vide an order dated 25.03.2014, proceeded to impose upon him, a penalty of “reduction of basic pay by 2(two) stages with cumulative effect”. Thereafter, the suspension of the petitioner was revoked, vide order dated 25.03.2014. The petitioner being aggrieved by the imposition of the said penalty, assailed the same by way of instituting a Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 5826/2014.

A coordinate Bench of this Court, vide an order dated 01.08.2024, proceeded to dispose of the said Writ Petition by interfering with the penalty as imposed upon the petitioner to the extent of the same being imposed with cumulative effect.

A coordinate Bench of this Court, vide the said judgment and order dated 01.08.2024, modified the penalty as imposed upon the petitioner to that of “Reduction of the Basic pay by 2 (two) stages”. The Coordinate Bench of this Court, while considering the penalty as imposed upon the petitioner, had, however, not made any observation, with regard to the manner in which the period of suspension of the petitioner is to be reckoned. The petitioner, thereafter, approached the respondent authorities for regularization of his period of suspension by relying on the provisions of Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 48 of the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010. The said approach of the petitioner, having not evoked any response from the respondents, the petitioner has instituted the present Writ Petition.

4. Mr. R Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner, by reiterating the facts as noticed hereinabove, has submitted that Regulation 48 of the said Regulations of 2010, mandates the manner in which the period of suspension of an employee, who is subjected to a disciplinary proceeding, is to be reckoned. He submits that the respondent authorities, in terms of the Sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 48, is to pass an order with regard to the manner in which the period of suspension is to be so reckoned while imposing the penalty upon the petitioner, on conclusion of the disciplinary proceeding instituted against him. Mr. R Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order, passed by the disciplinary authority, imposing the penalty upon the petitioner, does not deal with the period of suspension un