Gauhati High Court
Md. Nekibuddin Ahmed vs The State Of Assam And 2 Ors on 23 November, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010170092021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/5647/2021
MD. NEKIBUDDIN AHMED
S/O- MD. TAHER ALI, R/O- VILL- 2 NO. JALAH, P.O. BORALABARI, P.S.
CHANGSARI, DIST.- KAMRUP (R), PIN- 781101
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, ANIMAL
HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-06
2:THE DIRECTOR
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY DEPTT.
CHENIKUTHI
GHY-03
3:THE DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY OFFICER
KAMRUP
CHENIKUTHI
GHY-0
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A GOGOI
Advocate for the Respondent : SR. GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
23.11.2021
Heard Mr. A. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia,
learned counsel for the respondents.
Page No.# 2/3
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by his suspension order dated 13.03.2020 made w.e.f.
23.09.2019. The petitioner's counsel submits that no departmental proceeding/charge-sheet
has been initiated/submitted against the petitioner. He also submits that as the petitioner's
suspension period has not been reviewed for extension of the suspension period, the
petitioner's suspension should be set aside in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in
Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India, reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291.
3. Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents have
initiated a departmental proceeding against the petitioner by issuing a show-cause-notice to
him on 18.11.2021.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. The petitioner was arrested in connection with the North Guwahati Police Station Case
No.130/2019 under Section 448/354-A/376/511 of IPC read with Section 4/18 of the POCSO
Act, 2012.
6. The petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 13.03.2020 w.e.f.
23.09.2019 i.e. the date of his arrest by the police.
7. The petitioner was thereafter released on bail on 04.10.2019.
8. The affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no.1, 2 and 3 on 22.11.2021 shows
that a departmental proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner by issuing him a
show-cause-notice dated 18.11.2021. The petitioner's prayer for setting aside his suspension
order has been made in this writ petition which has been filed on an earlier point of time, i.e.
on 06.10.2021. Further, there is nothing in the affidavit submitted by the respondents
showing that there has been any review of the petitioner's suspension order till date. The
Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra) has made it mandatory for the
Page No.# 3/3
Disciplinary Authority to have a review of the suspension order within 90 days, subject to the
condition that no departmental enquiry/charge-sheet has been initiated/filed against the
delinquent officer, failing which the delinquent officer is to be reinstated. In the present case,
as stated above, no review has been conducted by the respondent authorities till date. Also
the departmental inquiry has been initiated only after the writ petition has been filed.
9. In view of the above facts, this Court is of the view that the petitioner cannot be
denied the mandate of the law regarding suspension, as held by the Apex Court in Ajay
Kumar Choudhary (supra). Accordingly the suspension order dated 13.03.2020 issued by the
Director, A.H. & Veterinary Department, Assam is hereby set aside. The respondents shall
immediately reinstate the petitioner.
10. The writ petition is accordingly disposed off.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
