Judgment & Order (Oral)

Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the judgment : N/A

Whether the full judgment has been Pronounced : Yes

Heard Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. H. Nabam, learned Additional Advocate General for the State respondents.

2. By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the suspension order vide No. TPT(B)-11023(14)/1/2024/339 dated 12.08.2025, issued on 20.08.2025, issued by the Commissioner, Transport Department, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, whereby the petitioner is placed under suspension in terms of Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 [hereinafter referred to as the “CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965”], pursuant to disciplinary proceedings being under way on the alleged malpractice in awarding work contracts, thereby incurring unauthorized expenditure, on the ground that the respondent authority has failed to review the suspension order within the mandatory period of 90 (ninety) days as per Sub-Rule (6) and (7) of Rule 10 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.

3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner was initially appoint