Gauhati High Court
Ranjit Gogoi vs State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 24 August, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010009022021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/338/2021
WITH
I.A.(C) 224/2021
RANJIT GOGOI
S/O LATE BISWA GOGOI, R/O JAGANNATH NIVAS, HOUSE NO. 8, UDAYAN
PATH, RUKMINI GAON, GUWAHATI 22, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF
ASSAM, INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS DEPTT., DISPUR,
GUWAHATI 781006
2:THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 781006
3:THE DEPUTY SECY.D TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 781006
4:THE DIRECTOR IN CHARGE
INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATION
ASSAM
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 0
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D DAS SR. ADV
Page No.# 2/3
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
Date : 24.08.2021
Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. H. Rahman,
learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned Addl.
Senior Govt. advocate appearing for respondent.
The petitioner was suspended by an order dated 14.11.2017 and the review
for extension of the order of suspension were passed on 15.12.2018,
12.03.2019, 27.08.2019, 28.11.2019, 05.06.2020 and 05.09.2020. It is further
projected that initially a show cause notice was issued on 30.10.2018 and by
withdrawing the said show cause notice, a second show cause notice was issued
on 17.11.2018 and after two years of continued suspension, an Inquiry Officer
was appointed on 15.12.2019 and only after a year Presenting Officer was
appointed on 06.01.2020. Therefore, aggrieved by the continued suspension of
the petitioner for almost 4(four) years, the petitioner has filed this writ petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
To support his submission that the continued suspension of the delinquent
employee has been deprecated by various judgments of this Court as well as
the Supreme Court of India, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner has always cooperated in the investigation and
that there is no material on record to show that because of the petitioner, the
enquiry was delayed at any point of given time.
Page No.# 3/3
It is also submitted that in the meanwhile in connection with the criminal
proceeding of the petitioner all the relevant materials have been seized and
produced. Hence, it is submitted that there is no chance that the petitioner may
influence any witness or temper with any evidence.
The learned Addl. Senior Govt. advocate has submitted that he has
instruction and would be filing the affidavit-in-opposition.
Accordingly, let a notice including the notice on the prayer for interim relief
returnable on 22.09.2021 be issued.
As all the respondents are represented, additional requisite copy of the writ
petition along with the copy of connected I.A. be furnished to the learned Addl.
Senior Govt. advocate in course of the day today.
In view of the ratio laid down in the case of Ajay Kr. Choudhary Vs. Union of
India, (2015) 7 SCC 291, the State is put to notice that on failure of the State to
file the affidavit-in-opposition, the Court may be invoke the doctrine of non-
traverse and pass appropriate orders on the next date.
List on 22.09.2021. The State shall file the affidavit-in-opposition at least
2(two) days prior to the next date of listing.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
